Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41250187›Full record

ArticleImplementation science communications2025

One size fits all? A latent profile analysis to identify care professional subgroups based on implementation determinants.

Eveline M Dubbeldeman, Rianne M J J van der Kleij, Jessica C Kiefte-de Jong, Hester M Diderich, Isabelle L L Gerding, Matty R Crone

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Eveline M DubbeldemanDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands. E.M.Dubbeldeman@lumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1217-158X
Rianne M J J van der KleijDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Jessica C Kiefte-de JongDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Hester M DiderichEmergency Department, Medical Center Haaglanden, The Hague, The Netherlands.
Isabelle L L GerdingEmergency Department, Medical Center Haaglanden, The Hague, The Netherlands.
Matty R CroneDepartment of Health Promotion, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.

Funding

ZonMw 729220001ZonMw 741500001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionWhile the importance of a more holistic approach to implementation science, recognizing the interconnection among implementation determinants and the heterogeneity of context and care professionals (CPs), has long been acknowledged, recent research has increasingly focused on these issues. Despite this growing attention, the practical application of these insights within implementation research remains limited. In this study, we aimed to identify distinctive subgroups of CPs based on their profiles of implementation determinants concerning the Childcheck, a guideline facilitating early identification of child abuse based on parental characteristics. We also explored the influence of organization type on subgroups of CPs with specific implementation characteristics (subgroup membership) and assessed their relationship to CPs implementation level.

methodsA total of 562 Dutch CPs in Mental Health Care (aMHC) and Forensic Care settings completed a self-reported questionnaire on Childcheck implementation determinants. We conducted Latent Profile Analysis to identify subgroups of CPs. The influence of organization type on subgroup membership was examined using Chi-Squared test and we explored the impact of subgroup membership on implementation levels using a one-way ANOVA.

resultsWe identified five distinct subgroups. Subgroup A (Reporting Center for Child Abuse and Neglect (RCCAN) collaboration issues, 11.7%) faced issues related to the external organization, such as feedback and collaboration issues. Subgroup B (RCCAN collaboration and organizational issues, 5.0%) encountered challenges with both the external and internal organization, including issues with financial resources and formal agreements, resulting in the lowest implementation level. Subgroup C (Limited implementation issues, 9.4%) demonstrated relatively high ratings across determinants, achieving the highest implementation level. CPs in subgroup D (CP-client interaction issues, 37.7%) encountered challenges in CP-client interaction. CPs in subgroup E (Indifferent attitudes towards implementation, 36.1%) expressed low to average retings, were mainly from aMHC settings, and reported a low to average implementation level.

conclusionsThis study highlights the importance of tailored implementation plans to address each subgroup's specific needs and challenges, instead of employing a one-size-fits-all approach. Latent Profile Analysis successfully revealed the variations in implementation determinants among CPs in aMHC and Forensic Care settings. Tailoring implementation strategies for these subgroups is key to successful guideline implementation and enhancing the well-being of vulnerable children and families.

Indexed as

ChildcheckForensic careImplementation determinantsLatent profile analysesMental health careVulnerable children and families

Identifiers

PMID41250187
PMCPMC12625321

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.