Developing a practice-driven research agenda in implementation science: Perspectives from experienced implementation support practitioners.

Implementation research and practice Pub Date : 2023-09-03 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1177/26334895231199063
Todd M Jensen, Allison J Metz, Mackensie E Disbennett, Amanda B Farley
{"title":"Developing a practice-driven research agenda in implementation science: Perspectives from experienced implementation support practitioners.","authors":"Todd M Jensen,&nbsp;Allison J Metz,&nbsp;Mackensie E Disbennett,&nbsp;Amanda B Farley","doi":"10.1177/26334895231199063","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Attention is being placed on the \"ironic gap\" or \"secondary\" research-to-practice gap in the field of implementation science. Among several challenges posited to exacerbate this research-to-practice gap, we call attention to one challenge in particular-the relative dearth of implementation research that is tethered intimately to the lived experiences of implementation support practitioners (ISPs). The purpose of this study is to feature a qualitative approach to engaging with highly experienced ISPs to inform the development of a practice-driven research agenda in implementation science. In general, we aim to encourage ongoing empirical inquiry that foregrounds practice-driven implementation research questions.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Our analytic sample was comprised of 17 professionals in different child and family service systems, each with long-term experience using implementation science frameworks to support change efforts. Data were collected via in-depth, semi-structured interviews. Our analysis followed a qualitative content analysis approach. Our focal conceptual category centered on the desired areas of future research highlighted by respondents, with subcategories reflecting subsets of related research question ideas.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Interviews yielded varying responses that could help shape a practice-driven research agenda for the field of implementation science. The following subcategories regarding desired areas for future research were identified in respondents' answers: (a) stakeholder engagement and developing trusting relationships, (b) evidence use, (c) workforce development, and (d) cost-effective implementation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There is significant promise in bringing implementation research and implementation practice together more closely and building a practice-informed research agenda to shape implementation science. Our findings point not only to valuable practice-informed gaps in the literature that could be filled by implementation researchers, but also topics for which dissemination and translation efforts may not have yielded optimal reach. We also highlight the value in ISPs bolstering their own capacity for engaging with the implementation science literature to the fullest extent possible.</p>","PeriodicalId":73354,"journal":{"name":"Implementation research and practice","volume":"4 ","pages":"26334895231199063"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/d9/15/10.1177_26334895231199063.PMC10478532.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Implementation research and practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/26334895231199063","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: 0

Abstract

Background: Attention is being placed on the "ironic gap" or "secondary" research-to-practice gap in the field of implementation science. Among several challenges posited to exacerbate this research-to-practice gap, we call attention to one challenge in particular-the relative dearth of implementation research that is tethered intimately to the lived experiences of implementation support practitioners (ISPs). The purpose of this study is to feature a qualitative approach to engaging with highly experienced ISPs to inform the development of a practice-driven research agenda in implementation science. In general, we aim to encourage ongoing empirical inquiry that foregrounds practice-driven implementation research questions.

Method: Our analytic sample was comprised of 17 professionals in different child and family service systems, each with long-term experience using implementation science frameworks to support change efforts. Data were collected via in-depth, semi-structured interviews. Our analysis followed a qualitative content analysis approach. Our focal conceptual category centered on the desired areas of future research highlighted by respondents, with subcategories reflecting subsets of related research question ideas.

Results: Interviews yielded varying responses that could help shape a practice-driven research agenda for the field of implementation science. The following subcategories regarding desired areas for future research were identified in respondents' answers: (a) stakeholder engagement and developing trusting relationships, (b) evidence use, (c) workforce development, and (d) cost-effective implementation.

Conclusions: There is significant promise in bringing implementation research and implementation practice together more closely and building a practice-informed research agenda to shape implementation science. Our findings point not only to valuable practice-informed gaps in the literature that could be filled by implementation researchers, but also topics for which dissemination and translation efforts may not have yielded optimal reach. We also highlight the value in ISPs bolstering their own capacity for engaging with the implementation science literature to the fullest extent possible.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

制定实施科学实践驱动的研究议程:经验丰富的实施支持从业者的观点。
背景:在实施科学领域,人们正在关注“讽刺性的差距”或“二次”研究与实践的差距。在加剧这一研究与实践差距的几个挑战中,我们提请注意一个挑战,特别是与实施支持从业者(ISP)的生活经历密切相关的实施研究相对缺乏。本研究的目的是采用定性方法与经验丰富的ISP接触,为实施科学中实践驱动的研究议程的制定提供信息。总的来说,我们的目标是鼓励正在进行的实证调查,以突出实践驱动的实施研究问题。方法:我们的分析样本由17名来自不同儿童和家庭服务系统的专业人员组成,每个人都有使用实施科学框架支持变革工作的长期经验。数据是通过深入的半结构化访谈收集的。我们的分析采用了定性内容分析方法。我们的重点概念类别集中在受访者强调的未来研究的期望领域,子类别反映了相关研究问题想法的子集。结果:访谈产生了不同的反应,有助于制定实施科学领域的实践驱动的研究议程。受访者的回答中确定了以下关于未来研究所需领域的子类别:(a)利益相关者参与和发展信任关系,(b)证据使用,(c)劳动力发展,以及(d)成本效益高的实施。结论:将实施研究和实施实践更紧密地结合在一起,建立一个以实践为基础的研究议程,以塑造实施科学,这是非常有希望的。我们的研究结果不仅指出了实施研究人员可以填补的文献中有价值的实践信息空白,还指出了传播和翻译工作可能无法达到最佳效果的主题。我们还强调了互联网服务提供商在尽可能充分地加强自身参与实施科学文献的能力方面的价值。
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