基于股权的实施科学:三个研究的比较案例分析。

IF 1.9 3区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Gabriela A Nagy, Eliut Rivera-Segarra, Leopoldo J Cabassa
{"title":"基于股权的实施科学:三个研究的比较案例分析。","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":"{\"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}","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

摘要

尽管在卫生保健方面的研究和治疗取得了进展,但将研究证据付诸实践仍然是一项挑战,特别是对历史上处于边缘地位的人群而言。人们多次呼吁采取行动,将卫生公平纳入实施科学框架、模型和理论。然而,迄今为止,行动呼吁的理论和愿望性质阻碍了更好地整合这些方法的进展,这构成了一项挑战,因为尚不清楚如何具体地从言辞转向行动。我们从我们的工作中提出三个案例,说明如何将卫生公平研究和实施科学协同到我们的“基于公平的实施科学”方法中,该方法侧重于位于这些领域交叉点的流程和实践。这三项不同的研究侧重于减少历史上边缘化社区,即美国大陆和波多黎各的拉丁裔和黑人个人的心理健康不公平现象。对于每项研究,我们都描述了研究目的、方法、开展活动的环境、健康公平因素和实施科学方面。我们阐明了每项研究如何通过(a)将研究活动置于社区环境中来连接实施科学和卫生公平研究;(b)共同设计干预措施以确保其文化、语言和语境相关性;(c)编织混合方法和社区参与的方法,以汲取社区的见解。最后,我们说明了如何解决这些健康公平研究中的关键实施结果,这是将修辞转化为减少边缘化社区心理健康不平等的可操作解决方案的重要一步。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Equity-grounded implementation science: Comparative case analysis of three studies.

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
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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