Where do psychologists turn to inform clinical decisions? Audience segmentation to guide dissemination strategies.

Implementation research and practice Pub Date : 2023-07-07 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1177/26334895231185376
Nayoung Kwon, Rebecca E Stewart, Xi Wang, Jacob S Marzalik, Lynn F Bufka, Raquel W Halfond, Jonathan Purtle
{"title":"Where do psychologists turn to inform clinical decisions? Audience segmentation to guide dissemination strategies.","authors":"Nayoung Kwon,&nbsp;Rebecca E Stewart,&nbsp;Xi Wang,&nbsp;Jacob S Marzalik,&nbsp;Lynn F Bufka,&nbsp;Raquel W Halfond,&nbsp;Jonathan Purtle","doi":"10.1177/26334895231185376","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Audience segmentation is an analysis technique that can identify meaningful subgroups within a population to inform the tailoring of dissemination strategies. We have conducted an empirical clustering audience segmentation study of licensed psychologists using survey data about the sources of knowledge they report most often consulting to guide their clinical decision-making. We identify meaningful subgroups within the population and inform the tailoring of dissemination strategies for evidence-based practice (EBP) materials.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Data come from a 2018-2019 web-based survey of licensed psychologists who were members of the American Psychological Association (APA; <i>N</i> = 518, response rate = 29.8%). Ten dichotomous variables assessed sources that psychologists regularly consult to inform clinical decision-making (e.g., colleagues, academic literature, and practice guidelines). We used latent class analysis to identify segments of psychologists who turn to similar sources and named each segment based on the segment's most salient characteristics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Four audience segments were identified: the No-guidelines (45% of psychologists), Research-driven (16%), Thirsty-for-knowledge (9%), and No-reviews (30%). The four segments differed not only in their preferred sources of knowledge, but also in the types of evidence-based posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) treatments they provide, their awareness and usage intention of the APA PTSD clinical practice guideline, and attitudes toward clinical practice guidelines.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results demonstrate that licensed psychologists are heterogeneous in terms of their knowledge-seeking behaviors and preferences for knowledge sources. The distinctive characteristics of these segments could guide the tailoring of dissemination materials and strategies to subsequently enhance the implementation of EBP among psychologists.</p>","PeriodicalId":73354,"journal":{"name":"Implementation research and practice","volume":"4 ","pages":"26334895231185376"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/aa/f8/10.1177_26334895231185376.PMC10331216.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Implementation research and practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/26334895231185376","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Audience segmentation is an analysis technique that can identify meaningful subgroups within a population to inform the tailoring of dissemination strategies. We have conducted an empirical clustering audience segmentation study of licensed psychologists using survey data about the sources of knowledge they report most often consulting to guide their clinical decision-making. We identify meaningful subgroups within the population and inform the tailoring of dissemination strategies for evidence-based practice (EBP) materials.

Method: Data come from a 2018-2019 web-based survey of licensed psychologists who were members of the American Psychological Association (APA; N = 518, response rate = 29.8%). Ten dichotomous variables assessed sources that psychologists regularly consult to inform clinical decision-making (e.g., colleagues, academic literature, and practice guidelines). We used latent class analysis to identify segments of psychologists who turn to similar sources and named each segment based on the segment's most salient characteristics.

Results: Four audience segments were identified: the No-guidelines (45% of psychologists), Research-driven (16%), Thirsty-for-knowledge (9%), and No-reviews (30%). The four segments differed not only in their preferred sources of knowledge, but also in the types of evidence-based posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) treatments they provide, their awareness and usage intention of the APA PTSD clinical practice guideline, and attitudes toward clinical practice guidelines.

Conclusion: The results demonstrate that licensed psychologists are heterogeneous in terms of their knowledge-seeking behaviors and preferences for knowledge sources. The distinctive characteristics of these segments could guide the tailoring of dissemination materials and strategies to subsequently enhance the implementation of EBP among psychologists.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

心理学家在哪里为临床决策提供信息?受众细分以指导传播策略。
背景:受众细分是一种分析技术,可以识别人群中有意义的亚组,为制定传播策略提供信息。我们对持照心理学家进行了一项实证聚类受众细分研究,使用了他们报告的最常咨询的知识来源的调查数据来指导他们的临床决策。我们在人群中确定了有意义的亚组,并为循证实践(EBP)材料的传播策略定制提供信息。方法:数据来自2018-2019年对美国心理协会(APA;N = 518,响应率 = 29.8%)。10个二分变量评估了心理学家定期咨询以告知临床决策的来源(例如,同事、学术文献和实践指南)。我们使用潜在类别分析来识别那些求助于相似来源的心理学家的片段,并根据片段最显著的特征命名每个片段。结果:确定了四个受众群体:无指导原则(45%的心理学家)、研究驱动型(16%)、渴望知识型(9%)和无评论型(30%)。这四个部分的差异不仅在于他们首选的知识来源,还在于他们提供的循证创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)治疗的类型、他们对APA PTSD临床实践指南的认识和使用意图,以及对临床实践指导方针的态度。结论:研究结果表明,持照心理学家在知识寻求行为和对知识来源的偏好方面存在异质性。这些环节的独特特征可以指导传播材料和策略的定制,从而在心理学家中加强EBP的实施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
18 weeks
×
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