Equity-grounded implementation science: Comparative case analysis of three studies.

IF 1.9 3区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Gabriela A Nagy, Eliut Rivera-Segarra, Leopoldo J Cabassa
{"title":"Equity-grounded implementation science: Comparative case analysis of three studies.","authors":"Gabriela A Nagy, Eliut Rivera-Segarra, Leopoldo J Cabassa","doi":"10.1037/ser0000931","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Despite research and treatment advances in health care, the implementation of research evidence into practice remains a challenge, especially for historically marginalized populations. There have been numerous calls to action to integrate health equity into implementation science frameworks, models, and theories. Yet, progress toward better integration of these approaches has been hampered by the theoretical and aspirational nature of calls to action up to the present time, which poses a challenge as it remains unclear how to specifically move from rhetoric to action. We present three case examples from our work to illustrate how to synergize health equity research and implementation science into our approach to \"equity-grounded implementation science\" focused on processes and practices located at the intersection of these fields. These three distinct studies focused on reducing mental health inequities in historically marginalized communities, namely, Latino and Black individuals in mainland United States and Puerto Rico. For each study, we describe the study aim, methodology, setting in which activities were carried out, the health equity elements, and the implementation science aspects. We articulate how each study bridged implementation science and health equity research by (a) situating the study activities in community settings; (b) codesigning interventions to ensure their cultural, linguistic, and contextual relevance; and (c) weaving mixed methods and community-engaged approaches to draw community insights. Finally, we illustrate how to address key implementation outcomes in these health equity studies, representing a significant step toward turning rhetoric into actionable solutions for reducing mental health inequities in marginalized communities. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20749,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Services","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Services","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/ser0000931","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Despite research and treatment advances in health care, the implementation of research evidence into practice remains a challenge, especially for historically marginalized populations. There have been numerous calls to action to integrate health equity into implementation science frameworks, models, and theories. Yet, progress toward better integration of these approaches has been hampered by the theoretical and aspirational nature of calls to action up to the present time, which poses a challenge as it remains unclear how to specifically move from rhetoric to action. We present three case examples from our work to illustrate how to synergize health equity research and implementation science into our approach to "equity-grounded implementation science" focused on processes and practices located at the intersection of these fields. These three distinct studies focused on reducing mental health inequities in historically marginalized communities, namely, Latino and Black individuals in mainland United States and Puerto Rico. For each study, we describe the study aim, methodology, setting in which activities were carried out, the health equity elements, and the implementation science aspects. We articulate how each study bridged implementation science and health equity research by (a) situating the study activities in community settings; (b) codesigning interventions to ensure their cultural, linguistic, and contextual relevance; and (c) weaving mixed methods and community-engaged approaches to draw community insights. Finally, we illustrate how to address key implementation outcomes in these health equity studies, representing a significant step toward turning rhetoric into actionable solutions for reducing mental health inequities in marginalized communities. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Psychological Services
Psychological Services PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
13.00%
发文量
216
期刊介绍: Psychological Services publishes high-quality data-based articles on the broad range of psychological services. While the Division"s focus is on psychologists in "public service," usually defined as being employed by a governmental agency, Psychological Services covers the full range of psychological services provided in any service delivery setting. Psychological Services encourages submission of papers that focus on broad issues related to psychotherapy outcomes, evaluations of psychological service programs and systems, and public policy analyses.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信