干预适应的综合方法(CLARION):开发和开展经验和理论驱动的干预适应。

Lydia Ould Brahim, Sylvie D Lambert, Nancy Feeley, Jane McCusker, Dan Bilsker, Mark J Yaffe, Rosetta Antonacci, Stephanie Robins, John William Kayser, Christine Genest, Haida Paraskevopoulos, Jessica Blair, Andrea Laizner
{"title":"干预适应的综合方法(CLARION):开发和开展经验和理论驱动的干预适应。","authors":"Lydia Ould Brahim, Sylvie D Lambert, Nancy Feeley, Jane McCusker, Dan Bilsker, Mark J Yaffe, Rosetta Antonacci, Stephanie Robins, John William Kayser, Christine Genest, Haida Paraskevopoulos, Jessica Blair, Andrea Laizner","doi":"10.1186/s43058-025-00731-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Intervention adaptation, the deliberate modification of the design or delivery of interventions to a new context, is more resource efficient than de novo development. However, adaptation must be approached methodically, as some modifications, such as those to the core components, may compromise the intervention's initial efficacy. While adaptation frameworks have been published, none have been identified as more likely to result in successful adaptations. Further, frameworks lack the step-by-step details needed for operationalization. Therefore, the goal of this paper is to share our experience in addressing these methodological limitations in intervention adaptation. The objectives were to describe: 1) our development of a step-by-step, theoretically and empirically driven approach to intervention adaptation labelled the ConsoLidated AppRoach to Intervention adaptatiON (CLARION), 2) the application of CLARION in adapting a depression self-management intervention, 3) the facilitators and challenges encountered when using CLARION.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The development of CLARION was informed by the Medical Research Council guidance, the Method for Program Adaptation through Community Engagement (M-PACE), and a published scoping review identifying the key steps in existing adaptation frameworks. M-PACE was selected for its patient-oriented research principles, its application to a similar complex intervention, and for offering some of the specificity needed for execution. However, the scoping review indicated that M-PACE lacked three critical steps: selecting a candidate intervention, understanding its core components, and pre-testing the adapted intervention. These were added to form CLARION, which was structured in two stages: the first involves selecting an intervention, identifying core components, and deciding on modifications; the second stage solicits interest stakeholder feedback to assess the acceptability of the preliminary adapted intervention (pre-test).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Once CLARION was developed, it was put into action to adapt a depression self-management intervention. CLARION demonstrated several strengths: 1) clearly articulating core components before deciding on modifications, 2) mobilizing a diverse steering committee of experts, including patient partners and developers of the original intervention, which balanced input and efficiency, and 3) establishing committee decision-making rules prior to adjudication (specific criteria and 75% supermajority). Key challenges included defining the types of modifications requiring committee input, determining the extent of the committee's involvement, and prioritizing the presence of all committee members at meetings to avoid difficulties integrating incongruent feedback.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The development of CLARION contributes to best practices for intervention adaptation by identifying step-by-step guidance as well as facilitators and barriers to its application.</p>","PeriodicalId":73355,"journal":{"name":"Implementation science communications","volume":"6 1","pages":"59"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12083050/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Consolidated Approach to Intervention Adaptation (CLARION): Developing and undertaking an empirically and theoretically driven intervention adaptation.\",\"authors\":\"Lydia Ould Brahim, Sylvie D Lambert, Nancy Feeley, Jane McCusker, Dan Bilsker, Mark J Yaffe, Rosetta Antonacci, Stephanie Robins, John William Kayser, Christine Genest, Haida Paraskevopoulos, Jessica Blair, Andrea Laizner\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s43058-025-00731-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Intervention adaptation, the deliberate modification of the design or delivery of interventions to a new context, is more resource efficient than de novo development. However, adaptation must be approached methodically, as some modifications, such as those to the core components, may compromise the intervention's initial efficacy. While adaptation frameworks have been published, none have been identified as more likely to result in successful adaptations. Further, frameworks lack the step-by-step details needed for operationalization. Therefore, the goal of this paper is to share our experience in addressing these methodological limitations in intervention adaptation. The objectives were to describe: 1) our development of a step-by-step, theoretically and empirically driven approach to intervention adaptation labelled the ConsoLidated AppRoach to Intervention adaptatiON (CLARION), 2) the application of CLARION in adapting a depression self-management intervention, 3) the facilitators and challenges encountered when using CLARION.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The development of CLARION was informed by the Medical Research Council guidance, the Method for Program Adaptation through Community Engagement (M-PACE), and a published scoping review identifying the key steps in existing adaptation frameworks. M-PACE was selected for its patient-oriented research principles, its application to a similar complex intervention, and for offering some of the specificity needed for execution. However, the scoping review indicated that M-PACE lacked three critical steps: selecting a candidate intervention, understanding its core components, and pre-testing the adapted intervention. These were added to form CLARION, which was structured in two stages: the first involves selecting an intervention, identifying core components, and deciding on modifications; the second stage solicits interest stakeholder feedback to assess the acceptability of the preliminary adapted intervention (pre-test).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Once CLARION was developed, it was put into action to adapt a depression self-management intervention. CLARION demonstrated several strengths: 1) clearly articulating core components before deciding on modifications, 2) mobilizing a diverse steering committee of experts, including patient partners and developers of the original intervention, which balanced input and efficiency, and 3) establishing committee decision-making rules prior to adjudication (specific criteria and 75% supermajority). Key challenges included defining the types of modifications requiring committee input, determining the extent of the committee's involvement, and prioritizing the presence of all committee members at meetings to avoid difficulties integrating incongruent feedback.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The development of CLARION contributes to best practices for intervention adaptation by identifying step-by-step guidance as well as facilitators and barriers to its application.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73355,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Implementation science communications\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"59\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12083050/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Implementation science communications\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-025-00731-y\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Implementation science communications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-025-00731-y","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:干预措施适应,即有意修改干预措施的设计或实施以适应新的环境,比重新开发更节约资源。然而,适应必须有条不紊地进行,因为一些修改,例如对核心组成部分的修改,可能会损害干预措施的初始效果。虽然已经发布了适应框架,但没有一个框架被确定为更有可能导致成功的适应。此外,框架缺乏操作化所需的分步细节。因此,本文的目的是分享我们在解决干预适应的这些方法限制方面的经验。目标是描述:1)我们逐步发展的,理论和经验驱动的干预适应方法,称为干预适应综合方法(CLARION), 2) CLARION在适应抑郁症自我管理干预中的应用,3)使用CLARION时遇到的促进因素和挑战。方法:CLARION的开发参考了医学研究委员会指南、通过社区参与的项目适应方法(M-PACE)和一份已发表的范围审查,该审查确定了现有适应框架中的关键步骤。M-PACE之所以被选中,是因为其以患者为导向的研究原则,它适用于类似的复杂干预措施,并且提供了执行所需的一些特异性。然而,范围审查表明M-PACE缺乏三个关键步骤:选择候选干预措施,了解其核心成分,以及对适应的干预措施进行预测试。这些被添加到CLARION中,它的结构分为两个阶段:第一阶段包括选择干预措施,识别核心组件,并决定修改;第二阶段征求利益相关者反馈,以评估初步适应性干预的可接受性(预测试)。结果:CLARION一经开发,就被应用于抑郁症自我管理干预。CLARION展示了几个优势:1)在决定修改之前明确阐明核心组成部分;2)动员多元化的专家指导委员会,包括患者合作伙伴和原始干预措施的开发人员,以平衡投入和效率;3)在裁决之前建立委员会决策规则(具体标准和75%的绝对多数)。关键的挑战包括定义需要委员会输入的修改类型,确定委员会参与的程度,以及确定所有委员会成员出席会议的优先级,以避免整合不一致反馈的困难。结论:CLARION的开发通过确定逐步指导及其应用的促进因素和障碍,有助于干预措施适应的最佳实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Consolidated Approach to Intervention Adaptation (CLARION): Developing and undertaking an empirically and theoretically driven intervention adaptation.

Background: Intervention adaptation, the deliberate modification of the design or delivery of interventions to a new context, is more resource efficient than de novo development. However, adaptation must be approached methodically, as some modifications, such as those to the core components, may compromise the intervention's initial efficacy. While adaptation frameworks have been published, none have been identified as more likely to result in successful adaptations. Further, frameworks lack the step-by-step details needed for operationalization. Therefore, the goal of this paper is to share our experience in addressing these methodological limitations in intervention adaptation. The objectives were to describe: 1) our development of a step-by-step, theoretically and empirically driven approach to intervention adaptation labelled the ConsoLidated AppRoach to Intervention adaptatiON (CLARION), 2) the application of CLARION in adapting a depression self-management intervention, 3) the facilitators and challenges encountered when using CLARION.

Methods: The development of CLARION was informed by the Medical Research Council guidance, the Method for Program Adaptation through Community Engagement (M-PACE), and a published scoping review identifying the key steps in existing adaptation frameworks. M-PACE was selected for its patient-oriented research principles, its application to a similar complex intervention, and for offering some of the specificity needed for execution. However, the scoping review indicated that M-PACE lacked three critical steps: selecting a candidate intervention, understanding its core components, and pre-testing the adapted intervention. These were added to form CLARION, which was structured in two stages: the first involves selecting an intervention, identifying core components, and deciding on modifications; the second stage solicits interest stakeholder feedback to assess the acceptability of the preliminary adapted intervention (pre-test).

Results: Once CLARION was developed, it was put into action to adapt a depression self-management intervention. CLARION demonstrated several strengths: 1) clearly articulating core components before deciding on modifications, 2) mobilizing a diverse steering committee of experts, including patient partners and developers of the original intervention, which balanced input and efficiency, and 3) establishing committee decision-making rules prior to adjudication (specific criteria and 75% supermajority). Key challenges included defining the types of modifications requiring committee input, determining the extent of the committee's involvement, and prioritizing the presence of all committee members at meetings to avoid difficulties integrating incongruent feedback.

Conclusions: The development of CLARION contributes to best practices for intervention adaptation by identifying step-by-step guidance as well as facilitators and barriers to its application.

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
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
24 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