项目评估和传播的障碍和促进因素:一项为实施策略提供信息的定性研究。

IF 1.2 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Laura E Balis, Shelly Palmer, Maryan Isack, Amy L Yaroch
{"title":"项目评估和传播的障碍和促进因素:一项为实施策略提供信息的定性研究。","authors":"Laura E Balis, Shelly Palmer, Maryan Isack, Amy L Yaroch","doi":"10.1177/15248399251362163","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Implementation strategies support the adoption, implementation, and maintenance of evidence-based interventions in community settings. However, strategies often conclude when funding ends, leaving implementers without assistance to maintain interventions. Implementation strategies focused on program evaluation and dissemination-factors that lead to program maintenance-are needed. The goal of this study was to understand barriers and facilitators to evaluation and dissemination in community-based organizations to inform relevant implementation strategies. Semi-structured interviews were conducted using an interview guide based on Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) constructs hypothesized to influence evaluation and dissemination: complexity, self-efficacy, culture, available resources, leadership engagement, organizational incentives and rewards, external policies and incentives, reflecting and evaluating, and champions. The guide also queried implementation strategy preferences. A rapid deductive approach was used to analyze the data through a template aligned with the interview guide. Nine interviewees shared barriers around reflecting and evaluating (e.g., data collection challenges), available resources (e.g., organizational capacity), and organizational incentives and rewards (e.g., lack of recognition). Interviewees favored ongoing consultation, tools or plans, problem-solving support, and peer sharing. Based on these results, a technical assistance (TA) protocol was developed to include monthly consultation meetings and quarterly learning collaboratives to build capacity in project partner (UnitedHealthcare) grantees. Future work should evaluate the TA protocol for effectiveness in alleviating the identified barriers and improving program implementers' evaluation and dissemination capacity. If successful, this model could be used in other community settings experiencing similar barriers, ultimately leading to improved maintenance of evidence-based interventions.</p>","PeriodicalId":47956,"journal":{"name":"Health Promotion Practice","volume":" ","pages":"15248399251362163"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Barriers and Facilitators to Program Evaluation and Dissemination: A Qualitative Study to Inform Implementation Strategies.\",\"authors\":\"Laura E Balis, Shelly Palmer, Maryan Isack, Amy L Yaroch\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15248399251362163\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Implementation strategies support the adoption, implementation, and maintenance of evidence-based interventions in community settings. However, strategies often conclude when funding ends, leaving implementers without assistance to maintain interventions. Implementation strategies focused on program evaluation and dissemination-factors that lead to program maintenance-are needed. The goal of this study was to understand barriers and facilitators to evaluation and dissemination in community-based organizations to inform relevant implementation strategies. Semi-structured interviews were conducted using an interview guide based on Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) constructs hypothesized to influence evaluation and dissemination: complexity, self-efficacy, culture, available resources, leadership engagement, organizational incentives and rewards, external policies and incentives, reflecting and evaluating, and champions. The guide also queried implementation strategy preferences. A rapid deductive approach was used to analyze the data through a template aligned with the interview guide. Nine interviewees shared barriers around reflecting and evaluating (e.g., data collection challenges), available resources (e.g., organizational capacity), and organizational incentives and rewards (e.g., lack of recognition). Interviewees favored ongoing consultation, tools or plans, problem-solving support, and peer sharing. Based on these results, a technical assistance (TA) protocol was developed to include monthly consultation meetings and quarterly learning collaboratives to build capacity in project partner (UnitedHealthcare) grantees. Future work should evaluate the TA protocol for effectiveness in alleviating the identified barriers and improving program implementers' evaluation and dissemination capacity. If successful, this model could be used in other community settings experiencing similar barriers, ultimately leading to improved maintenance of evidence-based interventions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47956,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Promotion Practice\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"15248399251362163\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Promotion Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15248399251362163\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Promotion Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15248399251362163","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

实施战略支持在社区环境中采用、实施和维持循证干预措施。然而,当资金结束时,战略往往就会结束,使执行者无法获得维持干预措施的援助。需要注重项目评估和传播的实施策略——导致项目维护的因素。本研究的目的是了解社区组织中评价和传播的障碍和促进因素,以便为相关的实施战略提供信息。半结构化访谈采用访谈指南进行,访谈指南基于假设影响评估和传播的综合实施框架研究(CFIR)结构:复杂性、自我效能感、文化、可用资源、领导参与、组织激励和奖励、外部政策和激励、反思和评估、冠军。该指南还询问了实施策略的偏好。通过与访谈指南一致的模板,采用快速演绎法分析数据。9位受访者分享了在反思和评估方面的障碍(例如,数据收集方面的挑战)、可用资源(例如,组织能力)以及组织激励和奖励(例如,缺乏认可)。受访者喜欢持续咨询、工具或计划、解决问题的支持和同行分享。根据这些结果,制定了一项技术援助(TA)协议,其中包括每月的咨询会议和每季度的学习协作,以建设项目合作伙伴(UnitedHealthcare)受资助者的能力。未来的工作应该评估TA协议在缓解已确定的障碍和提高项目实施者的评估和传播能力方面的有效性。如果成功,这一模式可以在其他遇到类似障碍的社区环境中使用,最终改善以证据为基础的干预措施的维持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Barriers and Facilitators to Program Evaluation and Dissemination: A Qualitative Study to Inform Implementation Strategies.

Implementation strategies support the adoption, implementation, and maintenance of evidence-based interventions in community settings. However, strategies often conclude when funding ends, leaving implementers without assistance to maintain interventions. Implementation strategies focused on program evaluation and dissemination-factors that lead to program maintenance-are needed. The goal of this study was to understand barriers and facilitators to evaluation and dissemination in community-based organizations to inform relevant implementation strategies. Semi-structured interviews were conducted using an interview guide based on Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) constructs hypothesized to influence evaluation and dissemination: complexity, self-efficacy, culture, available resources, leadership engagement, organizational incentives and rewards, external policies and incentives, reflecting and evaluating, and champions. The guide also queried implementation strategy preferences. A rapid deductive approach was used to analyze the data through a template aligned with the interview guide. Nine interviewees shared barriers around reflecting and evaluating (e.g., data collection challenges), available resources (e.g., organizational capacity), and organizational incentives and rewards (e.g., lack of recognition). Interviewees favored ongoing consultation, tools or plans, problem-solving support, and peer sharing. Based on these results, a technical assistance (TA) protocol was developed to include monthly consultation meetings and quarterly learning collaboratives to build capacity in project partner (UnitedHealthcare) grantees. Future work should evaluate the TA protocol for effectiveness in alleviating the identified barriers and improving program implementers' evaluation and dissemination capacity. If successful, this model could be used in other community settings experiencing similar barriers, ultimately leading to improved maintenance of evidence-based interventions.

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
Health Promotion Practice
Health Promotion Practice PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
5.30%
发文量
126
期刊介绍: Health Promotion Practice (HPP) publishes authoritative articles devoted to the practical application of health promotion and education. It publishes information of strategic importance to a broad base of professionals engaged in the practice of developing, implementing, and evaluating health promotion and disease prevention programs. The journal"s editorial board is committed to focusing on the applications of health promotion and public health education interventions, programs and best practice strategies in various settings, including but not limited to, community, health care, worksite, educational, and international settings. Additionally, the journal focuses on the development and application of public policy conducive to the promotion of health and prevention of disease.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信