Evaluation & the Health Professions最新文献

{"title":"Community Engagement in Research: An Updated Systematic Review of Quantitative Engagement Measurement Scales for Health Studies.","authors":"Barbara Gordon, Kristin M Van De Griend, Victoria L Scharp, Hannah Ellis, Mary A Nies","doi":"10.1177/01632787231203346","DOIUrl":"10.1177/01632787231203346","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Though the interest in community engagement in research (CEnR) protocols has increased, studies reporting on the findings of tested CEnR engagement measurement scales for health studies are sparse. A systematic review was conducted from January 1 to March 1, 2023, to identify validated, quantitative CEnR engagement measurement tools for health studies. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology was employed. The rigor of scale development, testing, and implementation was explored, and a `best practices evaluation conducted. Themes on the readiness of scales for implementation in health research studies were narratively compiled. Nineteen studies met the search inclusion criteria-reporting on the development, testing, and implementation of seven CEnR engagement measurement scales for health studies. Scale implementation studies precipitated only two of the studies. None of the scales followed the rigorous process dictated in best practices; however, at this time, three scales have gone through the most robust testing processes. Advancement of the science of engagement measurement requires consensus on terminology, application of best practices for scale development and testing protocols, and consistency of reporting findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":12315,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation & the Health Professions","volume":" ","pages":"291-308"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41107144","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Measurement Characteristics of the Wraparound Fidelity Index Short Form: Results from a Statewide Implementation.","authors":"Brandon K Attell, Ashley C Singleton, Susan A McLaren, Giselle Moses","doi":"10.1177/01632787231175184","DOIUrl":"10.1177/01632787231175184","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Implementation fidelity has been an important issue in the service provision and associated outcomes of Wraparound, an intensive, individualized care planning process that uses a team-based approach to integrate youth into the community to minimize the need for intensive, institutional services. In response to the growing need to monitor fidelity to the Wraparound process, a variety of instruments have been created and tested. In this study, the authors present the results of several analyses designed to better understand the measurement characteristics of the Wraparound Fidelity Index Short Form (WFI-EZ), a multi-informant fidelity instrument. The results from our analysis of 1027 WFI-EZ responses indicate that the internal consistency of the instrument is very good, although the negatively worded items did not appear to function as well as positively worded items. Results from two confirmatory factor analyses were unable to validate the original domains identified by the instrument developers, but for certain outcomes the WFI-EZ demonstrated deseriable predictive validity. Preliminary evidence is also provided that WFI-EZ responses likely differ by respondent type. We conclude by discussing the implications of using the WFI-EZ in programming, policy, and practice considering the findings of our study.</p>","PeriodicalId":12315,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation & the Health Professions","volume":" ","pages":"320-333"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10637074/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9751188","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Is the Self-Evaluation of Resilience a Valid Assessment to Measure Resilience in Healthcare? A Confirmatory validation Study in Italian Healthcare Settings.","authors":"Annalisa Pennini, Rosario Caruso, Gianluca Conte, Maddalena De Maria, Lauren Nirta, Arianna Magon, Giampaolo Armellin","doi":"10.1177/01632787231170236","DOIUrl":"10.1177/01632787231170236","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Although the Self-Evaluation of Resilience (SEOR) scale is a promising tool for assessing resilience in healthcare, its psychometric structure has not yet been confirmed. This study aimed to assess and validate the four-factor psychometric structure of the SEOR. Between September 2020 and January 2021, cross-sectional data were collected from randomly selected healthcare workers, managers, and administrators from a predefined network of 70 healthcare facilities in 12 Italian regions. The sample size was based on a Monte Carlo simulation using estimates from the SEOR developmental study. Two confirmatory factor models (first-order and second-order) were predefined. The responders (<i>n</i> = 199, response rate, 81%) were healthcare workers (<i>n</i> = 99; 49.7%), managers (<i>n</i> = 86; 43.2%), and administrators (<i>n</i> = 14; 7%). The two confirmatory factor models each showed a good fit in explaining sample statistics, corroborating the capacity of the scale to provide a total score of resilience and sub-scores for organizational resilience, network-based resilience, skill-based resilience, and individual-based resilience. The Molenaar-Sijtsma coefficients (internal consistency) ranged between 0.889 and 0.927. The SEOR enables managers and policy-makers to comprehensively screen resilience in healthcare from an epidemiological perspective.</p>","PeriodicalId":12315,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation & the Health Professions","volume":" ","pages":"396-404"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9992341","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Vaccine Conspiracy Beliefs Scale: Validation and Measurement Invariance in a Youth Sample.","authors":"Veljko Jovanović, Milica Lazić, Vesna Gavrilov-Jerković, Marija Zotović-Kostić, Vojana Obradović","doi":"10.1177/01632787231170237","DOIUrl":"10.1177/01632787231170237","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Vaccine Conspiracy Beliefs Scale (VCBS) is a widely used measure of conspiracy beliefs about vaccines, but evidence of its validity and measurement invariance, especially in youth samples, is still largely missing. The present study examined VCBS scores' factor structure, measurement invariance, convergent and discriminant validity, and incremental predictive validity. A sample of 803 Serbian youths (age range 15-24; 59.2% females) was recruited for the study. A modified single-factor model of the VCBS was supported, and showed evidence of full scalar invariance across gender, age, vaccination status, and personal history of COVID-19. Evidence of the VCBS scores' convergent and discriminant validity was obtained by examining associations with general conspiracy beliefs, vaccination attitudes, vaccination knowledge, intentions to get vaccinated against COVID-19, paranoia worries, fear of injections and blood draws, importance of God, self-rated health, and self-rated family's financial situation. The VCBS scores predicted a unique variance in the intention to get vaccinated against COVID-19, over and above vaccination attitudes and vaccination knowledge. The results suggest that the VCBS is a valid measure of vaccine conspiracy beliefs in youth.</p>","PeriodicalId":12315,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation & the Health Professions","volume":" ","pages":"362-370"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9284550","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Erratum to \"Is the Self-Evaluation of Resilience a Valid Assessment to Measure Resilience in Healthcare? A Confirmatory validation Study in Italian Healthcare Settings\".","authors":"","doi":"10.1177/01632787231181441","DOIUrl":"10.1177/01632787231181441","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":12315,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation & the Health Professions","volume":" ","pages":"405-406"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9692993","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Network Analysis for Formative Evaluation of Collaborative, Team Science Research Partnerships.","authors":"Grace M Liu, Meredith L Meadows, Katherine T Wiley, Jordan Jurinsky, Andrew A Anglemyer, Lucy L Wang, Joseph T Schneider, Sarah V Suiter","doi":"10.1177/01632787231195642","DOIUrl":"10.1177/01632787231195642","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Cancer health disparities persist across the cancer care continuum despite decades of effort to eliminate them. Among the strategies currently used to address these disparities are multi-institution research initiatives that engage multiple stakeholders and change efforts. Endemic to the theory of change of such programs is the idea that collaboration-across institutions, research disciplines, and academic ranks-is necessary to improve outcomes. Despite this emphasis on collaboration, however, it is not often a focus of evaluation for these programs and others like them. In this paper we describe a method for evaluating collaboration within the Meharry-Vanderbilt-Tennessee State University Cancer Partnership using network analysis. Specifically, we used network analysis of co-authorship on academic publications to visualize the growth and patterns of scientific collaboration across partnership institutions, research disciplines, and academic ranks over time. We presented the results of the network analysis to internal and external advisory groups, creating the opportunity to discuss partnership collaboration, celebrate successes, and identify opportunities for improvement. We propose that basic network analysis of existing data along with network visualizations can foster conversation and feedback and are simple and effective ways to evaluate collaboration initiatives.</p>","PeriodicalId":12315,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation & the Health Professions","volume":" ","pages":"334-343"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10637077/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10396772","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Relationship Between Fear of COVID-19, Conspiracy Beliefs About Vaccines and Intention to Vaccinate Against COVID-19: A Cross-National Indirect Effect Model in 13 Latin American Countries.","authors":"Tomás Caycho-Rodríguez, José M Tomás, Daniel E Yupanqui-Lorenzo, Pablo D Valencia, Carlos Carbajal-León, Lindsey W Vilca, José Ventura-León, Rubí Paredes-Angeles, Walter L Arias Gallegos, Mario Reyes-Bossio, Mariel Delgado-Campusano, Miguel Gallegos, Claudio Rojas-Jara, Roberto Polanco-Carrasco, Mauricio Cervigni, Pablo Martino, Marlon Elías Lobos-Rivera, Rodrigo Moreta-Herrera, Diego Alejandro Palacios Segura, Antonio Samaniego-Pinho, Andrés Buschiazzo Figares, Diana Ximena Puerta-Cortés, Andrés Camargo, Julio Torales, J Arkangel Monge Blanco, Pedronel González, Vanessa Smith-Castro, Olimpia Petzold-Rodriguez, Ibraín Enrique Corrales-Reyes, Raymundo Calderón, Wendy Yamilet Matute Rivera, Daniela Ferrufino-Borja, Paula Ceballos-Vásquez, Agueda Muñoz-Del-Carpio-Toia, Jorge Palacios, Carmen Burgos-Videla, Ana María Eduviges Florez León, Ibeth Vergara, Diego Vega, Marion K Shulmeyer, Nicol A Barria-Asenjo, Hassell Tatiana Urrutia Rios, Arelly Esther Lira Lira","doi":"10.1177/01632787231186621","DOIUrl":"10.1177/01632787231186621","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The present study explored the predictive capacity of fear of COVID-19 on the intention to be vaccinated against COVID-19 and the influence in this relationship of conspiracy beliefs as a possible mediating psychological variable, in 13 Latin American countries. A total of 5779 people recruited through non-probabilistic convenience sampling participated. To collect information, we used the Fear of COVID-19 Scale, Vaccine conspiracy beliefs Scale-COVID-19 and a single item of intention to vaccinate. A full a priori Structural Equation Model was used; whereas, cross-country invariance was performed from increasingly restricted structural models. The results indicated that, fear of COVID-19 positively predicts intention to vaccinate and the presence of conspiracy beliefs about COVID-19 vaccines. The latter negatively predicted intention to vaccinate against COVID-19. Besides, conspiracy beliefs about COVID-19 vaccines had an indirect effect on the relationship between fear of COVID-19 and intention to vaccinate against COVID-19 in the 13 countries assessed. Finally, the cross-national similarities of the mediational model among the 13 participating countries are strongly supported. The study is the first to test a cross-national mediational model across variables in a large number of Latin American countries. However, further studies with other countries in other regions of the world are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":12315,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation & the Health Professions","volume":" ","pages":"371-383"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10345832/pdf/10.1177_01632787231186621.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9836640","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Development and Validation of a Measure to Assess Readiness to Advance Health and Equity: The Assessment for Advancing Community Transformation (AACT).","authors":"Brandon K Attell, Kate Kingery, Tanisa Adimu, John Butts, Paul Howard, Somava Saha, Karen Minyard","doi":"10.1177/01632787221139244","DOIUrl":"10.1177/01632787221139244","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Multi-sector partnerships are core in efforts to improve population health but are often not as fully developed or positioned to advance health and equity in their communities as believed to be. Therefore, measuring the collaborations multi-sector partnerships undertake is important to document the inputs, processes, and outcomes that evolve as they work together towards achieving their goals, which ultimately creates a greater sense of shared accountability. In this study we present the development and validation of the Assessment for Advancing Community Transformation (AACT), a new tool designed to measure readiness to advance health and health equity. Development of the AACT included initial item pool creation, external evaluation from five subject matter experts, and pilot testing (including user feedback surveys) among 103 individuals. Validation of the AACT was performed using a series of confirmatory factor analyses on an expanded dataset representing 352 individuals from 49 multi-sector collaboratives across the United States. The results of our study indicate the items in the AACT align to six domains created during the scale development process, and that the tool demonstrates desirable measurement characteristics for use in research, evaluation, and practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":12315,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation & the Health Professions","volume":" ","pages":"309-319"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10637080/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10367172","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Researcher Views of Barriers to Clinical and Translational Research in a Statewide Program.","authors":"Judy A Kimberly, Stephen Kogut, John F Stevenson, Jacquelyn Fede, Anthony R Hayward, Meghan E Tenca","doi":"10.1177/01632787231167942","DOIUrl":"10.1177/01632787231167942","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Tracking and Evaluation Core of Rhode Island Advance-CTR conducted an online needs assessment survey at the program's inception in 2016 and again in 2021. Now dealing with well-established support systems provided by the grant, we were particularly interested in how the perceived needs of the research community in Rhode Island might have changed over five years. Specifically, what barriers have been reduced or eliminated and which have persisted or increased? How do those barriers vary by demographic status and what implications do those differences have for the CTR? An online survey was completed by 199 researchers, who reported the extent to which they perceived the lack of access to a range of research supports as a barrier to conducting research at their institution. Overall, researchers indicated statistically significant changes from 2016 to 2021 such that a lack of <i>pilot project funding</i> and <i>proposal development support</i> had decreased as barriers, while <i>space for research</i>, and <i>advice on commercial development</i>, had increased. Statistically significant differences in the salience of particular barriers by some demographic variables were also noted and the results of this study suggest Centers for Clinical and Translational Research can have salutary effects on the research paradigm within their partnering institutions in a relatively short time.</p>","PeriodicalId":12315,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation & the Health Professions","volume":" ","pages":"344-352"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10560312/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9614768","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Psychometric Assessment of the Physicians' Job Demands and Resources Scale.","authors":"Sérgio Moreira, Sofia Oliveira, Jorge Vala, Rui Costa-Lopes, Alexandra Marques-Pinto","doi":"10.1177/01632787231195077","DOIUrl":"10.1177/01632787231195077","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Job demands and resources have been consistently associated with the burnout syndrome in physicians, however the literature points to a lack of robust measures to assess these job characteristics across various medical specialties. This study aimed to develop a theoretically and empirically grounded physician-specific job demands and resources self-report measure - the <i>Physicians' Job Demands and Resources Scale</i>. Relevant dimensions of physicians' job demands and resources were identified, corresponding measurement items were generated and pre-tested, and the factor structure of the resulting 44 items was tested with a sample of 9,176 Portuguese physicians. The results of EFAs and CFAs with two random split samples provided consistent evidence of a nine-factor structure with 38 of the 44 items. Importantly, the nine-factor structure is consistent with the dimensions identified in the literature. The paper discusses the theoretical and practical impacts of the scale.</p>","PeriodicalId":12315,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation & the Health Professions","volume":" ","pages":"384-395"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10637071/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10011755","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}