Toward criteria for pragmatic measurement in implementation research and practice: A stakeholder-driven approach using concept mapping

Implementation Science

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2017, Pages

  Powell, Byron J ^a   Stanick, Cameo F ^b   Halko, Heather M ^c   Dorsey, Caitlin N ^d   Weiner, Bryan J ^e   Barwick, Melanie A ^f   Damschroder, Laura J ^g   Wensing, Michel ^h   Wolfenden, Luke ⁱ   Lewis, Cara C ^d  

^a IL   (United States)

^b Hathaway Sycamores Child and Family Services   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA   (United States)

^d KAISER PERMANENTE   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^f HOSPITAL FOR SICK CHILDREN   (Canada)

^g VA ANN ARBOR HEALTHCARE SYSTEM   (United States)

^h UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL HEIDELBERG   (Germany)

ⁱ UNIVERSITY OF NEWCASTLE   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLUSTER ANALYSIS; CONCEPT MAPPING; DELPHI STUDY; FIELD STUDY; HUMAN; MULTIDIMENSIONAL SCALING; STATISTICS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; INTERVIEW; PROCEDURES; STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT;

CLUSTER ANALYSIS; HEALTH PLAN IMPLEMENTATION; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMANS; INTERVIEWS AS TOPIC; STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION;

EID: 85030534500     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17485908     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s13012-017-0649-x     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Proctor EK, Powell BJ, Feely M. Measurement in dissemination and implementation science. In: Beidas RS, Kendall PC, editors. Dissemination and implementation of evidence-based practices in child and adolescent mental health. New York: Oxford University Press; 2014. p. 22-43.
2. Glasgow RE, Riley WT. Pragmatic measures: what they are and why we need them. Am J Prev Med. 2013;45:237-43.
3. Lewis CC, Weiner BJ, Stanick C, Fischer SM. Advancing implementation science through measure development and evaluation: a study protocol. Implement Sci. 2015;10:1-10.
4. Proctor EK, Silmere H, Raghavan R, Hovmand P, Aarons GA, Bunger A, et al. Outcomes for implementation research: conceptual distinctions, measurement challenges, and research agenda. Adm Policy Ment Health Ment Health Serv Res. 2011;38:65-76.
5. Weiner BJ, Lewis CC, Stanick CS, Powell BJ, Dorsey CN, Clary AS, et al. Psychometric assessment of three newly developed implementation outcome measures. Implement Sci. 2017;12:1-12.
6. Stanick CF, Halko H, Dorsey C, Weiner BJ, Powell BJ, Palinkas L, et al. A stakeholder-driven operationalization of the "pragmatic" measures construct. Under Rev.
7. Kane M, Trochim WMK. Concept mapping for planning and evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2007.
8. Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE, Kirsh SR, Alexander JA, Lowery JC. Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implement Sci. 2009;4:1-15.
9. Palinkas LA, Horwitz SM, Green CA, Wisdom JP, Duan N, Hoagwood K. Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Adm Policy Ment Health Ment Health Serv Res. 2013;42:533-44.
10. Trochim WMK. The reliability of concept mapping. Dallas, Texas; 1993. http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/research/Reliable/reliable.htm.
11. Trochim WMK, Kane M. Concept mapping: an introduction to structured conceptualization in health care. Int J Qual Health Care. 2005;17:187-91.
12. Rosas SR, Kane M. Quality and rigor of the concept mapping methodology: a pooled study analysis. Qual Rigor Concept Mapp Methodol Pool Study Anal. 2012;35:236-45.
13. Aarons GA, Wells RS, Zagursky K, Fettes DL, Palinkas LA. Implementing evidence-based practice in community mental health agencies: a multiple stakeholder analysis. Am J Public Health. 2009;99:2087-95.
14. Lobb R, Pinto AD, Lofters A. Using concept mapping in the knowledge-to-action process to compare stakeholder opinions on barriers to use of cancer screening among South Asians. Implement Sci. 2013;8:1-12.
15. Waltz TJ, Powell BJ, Matthieu MM, Damschroder LJ, Chinman MJ, Smith JL, et al. Use of concept mapping to characterize relationships among implementation strategies and assess their feasibility and importance: results from the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) study. Implement Sci. 2015;10:1-8.
16. Tabak RG, Padek MM, Kerner JF, Stange KC, Proctor EK, Dobbins MJ, et al. Dissemination and implementation science training needs: insights from practitioners and researchers. Am J Prev Med. 2017;52:S322-9.
17. Concept Systems, Inc. Concept Systems Global MAX. 2013. http://www.conceptsystems.com/gw/software. Accessed 2017.
18. Hsu C, Sanford BA. The Delphi technique: making sense of consensus. Pract Assess Res Eval. 2007;12:1-8.
19. Lewis CC, Stanick CF, Martinez RG, Weiner BJ, Kim M, Barwick M, et al. The Society for Implementation Research Collaboration Instrument Review Project: a methodology to promote rigorous evaluation. Implement Sci. 2015;10:1-18.