决策抽样框架:调查政策和方案创新中证据使用的方法学方法。

Thomas I Mackie, Ana J Schaefer, Justeen K Hyde, Laurel K Leslie, Emily A Bosk, Brittany Fishman, R Christopher Sheldrick
{"title":"决策抽样框架:调查政策和方案创新中证据使用的方法学方法。","authors":"Thomas I Mackie,&nbsp;Ana J Schaefer,&nbsp;Justeen K Hyde,&nbsp;Laurel K Leslie,&nbsp;Emily A Bosk,&nbsp;Brittany Fishman,&nbsp;R Christopher Sheldrick","doi":"10.1186/s13012-021-01084-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Calls have been made for greater application of the decision sciences to investigate and improve use of research evidence in mental health policy and practice. This article proposes a novel method, \"decision sampling,\" to improve the study of decision-making and research evidence use in policy and programmatic innovation. An illustrative case study applies the decision sampling framework to investigate the decisions made by mid-level administrators when developing system-wide interventions to identify and treat the trauma of children entering foster care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Decision sampling grounds qualitative inquiry in decision analysis to elicit information about the decision-making process. Our case study engaged mid-level managers in public sector agencies (n = 32) from 12 states, anchoring responses on a recent index decision regarding universal trauma screening for children entering foster care. Qualitative semi-structured interviews inquired on questions aligned with key components of decision analysis, systematically collecting information on the index decisions, choices considered, information synthesized, expertise accessed, and ultimately the values expressed when selecting among available alternatives.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Findings resulted in identification of a case-specific decision set, gaps in available evidence across the decision set, and an understanding of the values that guided decision-making. Specifically, respondents described 14 inter-related decision points summarized in five domains for adoption of universal trauma screening protocols, including (1) reach of the screening protocol, (2) content of the screening tool, (3) threshold for referral, (4) resources for screening startup and sustainment, and (5) system capacity to respond to identified needs. Respondents engaged a continuum of information that ranged from anecdote to research evidence, synthesizing multiple types of knowledge with their expertise. Policy, clinical, and delivery system experts were consulted to help address gaps in available information, prioritize specific information, and assess \"fit to context.\" The role of values was revealed as participants evaluated potential trade-offs and selected among policy alternatives.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The decision sampling framework is a novel methodological approach to investigate the decision-making process and ultimately aims to inform the development of future dissemination and implementation strategies by identifying the evidence gaps and values expressed by the decision-makers, themselves.</p>","PeriodicalId":417097,"journal":{"name":"Implementation Science : IS","volume":" ","pages":"24"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s13012-021-01084-5","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The decision sampling framework: a methodological approach to investigate evidence use in policy and programmatic innovation.\",\"authors\":\"Thomas I Mackie,&nbsp;Ana J Schaefer,&nbsp;Justeen K Hyde,&nbsp;Laurel K Leslie,&nbsp;Emily A Bosk,&nbsp;Brittany Fishman,&nbsp;R Christopher Sheldrick\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13012-021-01084-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Calls have been made for greater application of the decision sciences to investigate and improve use of research evidence in mental health policy and practice. This article proposes a novel method, \\\"decision sampling,\\\" to improve the study of decision-making and research evidence use in policy and programmatic innovation. An illustrative case study applies the decision sampling framework to investigate the decisions made by mid-level administrators when developing system-wide interventions to identify and treat the trauma of children entering foster care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Decision sampling grounds qualitative inquiry in decision analysis to elicit information about the decision-making process. Our case study engaged mid-level managers in public sector agencies (n = 32) from 12 states, anchoring responses on a recent index decision regarding universal trauma screening for children entering foster care. Qualitative semi-structured interviews inquired on questions aligned with key components of decision analysis, systematically collecting information on the index decisions, choices considered, information synthesized, expertise accessed, and ultimately the values expressed when selecting among available alternatives.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Findings resulted in identification of a case-specific decision set, gaps in available evidence across the decision set, and an understanding of the values that guided decision-making. Specifically, respondents described 14 inter-related decision points summarized in five domains for adoption of universal trauma screening protocols, including (1) reach of the screening protocol, (2) content of the screening tool, (3) threshold for referral, (4) resources for screening startup and sustainment, and (5) system capacity to respond to identified needs. Respondents engaged a continuum of information that ranged from anecdote to research evidence, synthesizing multiple types of knowledge with their expertise. Policy, clinical, and delivery system experts were consulted to help address gaps in available information, prioritize specific information, and assess \\\"fit to context.\\\" The role of values was revealed as participants evaluated potential trade-offs and selected among policy alternatives.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The decision sampling framework is a novel methodological approach to investigate the decision-making process and ultimately aims to inform the development of future dissemination and implementation strategies by identifying the evidence gaps and values expressed by the decision-makers, themselves.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":417097,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Implementation Science : IS\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"24\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s13012-021-01084-5\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Implementation Science : IS\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-021-01084-5\",\"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 : IS","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-021-01084-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

背景:人们呼吁在精神卫生政策和实践中更多地应用决策科学来调查和改进研究证据的使用。本文提出了一种新的方法,“决策抽样”,以改进决策研究和研究证据在政策和方案创新中的使用。一个说明性案例研究应用决策抽样框架来调查中层管理人员在制定全系统干预措施以识别和治疗进入寄养的儿童的创伤时所做的决定。方法:在决策分析中采用决策抽样进行定性调查,以获取决策过程的信息。我们的案例研究涉及来自12个州的公共部门机构的中层管理人员(n = 32),对最近关于对进入寄养的儿童进行普遍创伤筛查的指数决定进行了锚定。定性半结构化访谈询问的问题与决策分析的关键组成部分一致,系统地收集有关指数决策、考虑的选择、信息合成、获得的专业知识的信息,并最终在可用的备选方案中进行选择时表达的价值。结果:研究结果确定了具体案例的决策集、决策集中现有证据的差距,以及对指导决策的价值观的理解。具体来说,受访者描述了14个相互关联的决策点,总结为采用通用创伤筛查方案的五个领域,包括(1)筛查方案的范围,(2)筛查工具的内容,(3)转诊阈值,(4)筛查启动和维持的资源,以及(5)系统响应确定需求的能力。受访者参与了从轶事到研究证据的连续信息,用他们的专业知识综合了多种类型的知识。咨询了政策、临床和交付系统专家,以帮助解决现有信息中的差距,确定具体信息的优先次序,并评估“是否适合具体情况”。当参与者评估潜在的权衡和在政策选择中选择时,价值观的作用就显露出来了。结论:决策抽样框架是一种调查决策过程的新方法,其最终目的是通过识别证据差距和决策者自己表达的价值观,为未来传播和实施战略的制定提供信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

The decision sampling framework: a methodological approach to investigate evidence use in policy and programmatic innovation.

The decision sampling framework: a methodological approach to investigate evidence use in policy and programmatic innovation.

The decision sampling framework: a methodological approach to investigate evidence use in policy and programmatic innovation.

The decision sampling framework: a methodological approach to investigate evidence use in policy and programmatic innovation.

Background: Calls have been made for greater application of the decision sciences to investigate and improve use of research evidence in mental health policy and practice. This article proposes a novel method, "decision sampling," to improve the study of decision-making and research evidence use in policy and programmatic innovation. An illustrative case study applies the decision sampling framework to investigate the decisions made by mid-level administrators when developing system-wide interventions to identify and treat the trauma of children entering foster care.

Methods: Decision sampling grounds qualitative inquiry in decision analysis to elicit information about the decision-making process. Our case study engaged mid-level managers in public sector agencies (n = 32) from 12 states, anchoring responses on a recent index decision regarding universal trauma screening for children entering foster care. Qualitative semi-structured interviews inquired on questions aligned with key components of decision analysis, systematically collecting information on the index decisions, choices considered, information synthesized, expertise accessed, and ultimately the values expressed when selecting among available alternatives.

Results: Findings resulted in identification of a case-specific decision set, gaps in available evidence across the decision set, and an understanding of the values that guided decision-making. Specifically, respondents described 14 inter-related decision points summarized in five domains for adoption of universal trauma screening protocols, including (1) reach of the screening protocol, (2) content of the screening tool, (3) threshold for referral, (4) resources for screening startup and sustainment, and (5) system capacity to respond to identified needs. Respondents engaged a continuum of information that ranged from anecdote to research evidence, synthesizing multiple types of knowledge with their expertise. Policy, clinical, and delivery system experts were consulted to help address gaps in available information, prioritize specific information, and assess "fit to context." The role of values was revealed as participants evaluated potential trade-offs and selected among policy alternatives.

Conclusions: The decision sampling framework is a novel methodological approach to investigate the decision-making process and ultimately aims to inform the development of future dissemination and implementation strategies by identifying the evidence gaps and values expressed by the decision-makers, themselves.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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