Dissemination and implementation science resources, training, and scientific activities provided through CTSA programs nationally: Opportunities to advance D&I research and training capacity

A mapping review and critique of the literature on translation, dissemination, and implementation capacity building initiatives for different audiences

BACKGROUND

Capacity building is critical for research and practice as the fields of dissemination, implementation and translation science continue to grow. Some scholars state that capacity building should be grounded in competencies. However, the fields are unclear in determining which competencies are relevant for whom, including the content and appropriate level of information and skills for different roles. The goal of this study was to catalogue competencies across current D&I capacity building initiatives.

METHODS

We conducted a mapping review to examine to what extent are theories or frameworks used to guide capacity building, who is being trained, to what extent do capacity building initiatives include a health equity focus, which competencies are being outlined or suggested, how are they being defined, and whether the competencies can be organized along different roles of participants. As a mapping review, we broadly searched for papers using the keywords "training D&I" OR "training implementation" OR "training translation" OR "training dissemination" and included debate and empirical papers about capacity building initiatives in the sample.

RESULTS

A total of 42 articles (from 2011 to 2024) were reviewed, including training development and/or evaluation (n = 25) and conceptual (n = 17) articles. Of the training articles, 13 (52%) specified a framework that guided training. Participants in training included graduate students, researchers, practitioners, and mixed audiences. Fourteen (56%) of the trainings were conducted in the USA, seven (28%) in Canada and other countries. The length of training ranged from two days to two years. Four trainings had an explicit focus on equity. A total of 307 unique competencies were identified and divided into themes: Knowledge, Skills, Engagement with Other Disciplines, Equity, Attitude and Relational Aspects, Capacity Building, Quality Improvement, and Mentorship.

CONCLUSIONS

While there are many D&I capacity building initiatives, we found little consistency in competencies that guided training activities for diverse audiences. Few training activities explicitly identified guiding theories or frameworks or tailored competencies toward different levels of interest in D&I research. Even fewer had an explicit focus on health equity. As the fields continue to foster capacity building programs, it will be important to think critically about the types of competencies we are developing for whom, how, and why.

Construction on training course and training quality evaluation index system of chronic disease medication therapy management service (MTMs) in China: A Delphi study

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to construct a training course and quality evaluation index system for chronic disease Medication Therapy Management service (MTMs) that is suitable for China's national conditions. It seeks to provide tools and a scientific foundation for assessing the quality of MTMs training.

METHODS

Drawing from domestic and international literature and combining with the practice of chronic disease medication management by Chinese pharmacists, a preliminary framework for the evaluation index system was established. The Delphi method was used to solicit expert opinions, evaluate and improve the evaluation index system. Indicator weights were determined by using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP).

RESULTS

Both rounds of expert inquiry achieved a positive degree of 100% (18/18 experts). The authority coefficients (Cr) were 0.90 and 0.91 respectively. The Kendall coordination coefficients (Kendall's W) of the second and third-level indicators for the first round of inquiry were 0.230 and 0.189, while those for the second round were 0.326 and 0.213. Finally, an MTMs training course and training quality evaluation index system was structured, comprising 3 first-level indicators, 11 second-level indicators, and 39 third-level indicators.

CONCLUSION

The evaluation index system constructed in this study is scientifically robust and rational, offering a foundation to standardize MTMs training practices effectively.

Development of the Dissemination and Implementation Science Collaborative (DISC): Opportunities to enhance implementation science capacity among researchers and practitioners in South Carolina

This paper explores the development of the Dissemination and Implementation Science Collaborative (DISC) at the Medical University of South Carolina, established through the Clinical and Translational Science Award program. DISC aims to accelerate clinical and translational science by providing training, mentorship, and collaboration opportunities in dissemination and implementation (D&I) science. Through DISC, investigators, trainees, and community partners are equipped with the knowledge and skills to conduct D&I research and translate findings into practice, particularly in South Carolina's public health and healthcare landscape. We describe efforts to achieve the major overarching aims of DISC, which include conducting scientific workforce training, providing mentorship and consultation, and advancing methods and processes for D&I research. By sharing DISC experiences, successes, and challenges, this paper aims to support the growth of D&I research and capacity-building programs, fostering collaboration and shared resources in the field.

Exploring public health researchers' approaches, barriers, and needs regarding dissemination: A mixed-methods exploration

Background

Although there is growing attention to research translation, dissemination practices remain underdeveloped. This study aimed to gain insights into the dissemination approaches, barriers for dissemination, and needs for dissemination support of public health researchers of the Amsterdam Public Health (APH) research institute.

Methods

A concurrent mixed-methods design was used, collecting quantitative and qualitative data through a survey and qualitative data from interviews. Researchers of the Health Behaviors and Chronic Diseases (HBCD) research line of APH were approached via email with a link to an online survey. For the interviews, we aimed to balance researchers in terms of career phase and position. Data were analyzed through descriptive statistics and thematic content analysis.

Results

HBCD researchers primarily rely on traditional approaches for dissemination, e.g. academic journals (93%), conferences (93%), and reports to funders (71%). Social media (67%) was also frequently mentioned. Dissemination is often prioritized late due to time constraints and competing priorities. Researchers mentioned a lack of time, money, knowledge, and skills but also limited awareness of available support as barriers. A need for more resources, education, and a shift in mindset was expressed, suggesting a comprehensive inspiring platform and stronger in-house connections as solutions.

Conclusion

HBCD researchers emphasized the importance of dedicated time and budget for dissemination, as well as other forms of institutional support. Overall, there is a need for a shift in mindset, more educational initiatives, greater integration of dissemination into researchers' roles, the establishment of a comprehensive inspiring platform, and stronger in-house connections to support dissemination efforts.

Navigating the field of implementation science towards maturity: challenges and opportunities

BACKGROUND

The field of implementation science has significantly expanded in size and scope over the past two decades, although work related to understanding implementation processes have of course long preceded the more systematic efforts to improve integration of evidence-based interventions into practice settings. While this growth has had significant benefits to research, practice, and policy, there are some clear challenges that this period of adolescence has uncovered.

MAIN BODY

This invited commentary reflects on the development of implementation science, its rapid growth, and milestones in its establishment as a viable component of the biomedical research enterprise. The authors reflect on progress in research and training, and then unpack some of the consequences of rapid growth, as the field has grappled with the competing challenges of legitimacy among the research community set against the necessary integration and engagement with practice and policy partners. The article then enumerates a set of principles for the field's next developmental stage and espouses the aspirational goal of a "big tent" to support the next generation of impactful science.

CONCLUSION

For implementation science to expand its relevance and impact to practice and policy, researchers must not lose sight of the original purpose of the field-to support improvements in health and health care at scale, the importance of building a community of research and practice among key partners, and the balance of rigor, relevance, and societal benefit.

Disseminating for impact: creating curriculum activities for translational dissemination for the clinical and translational research workforce

There has been an increased focus on the practices associated with dissemination for the translation of research to clinical practice and ultimately, policy. Simultaneously, there has been attention placed on the role of the clinical research workforce in supporting optimal dissemination efforts for impact and societal benefit. Curriculums focused on education opportunities for dissemination for translational scientists have been under-reported. The Translational Science Benefits Model (TSBM) is a framework that has been developed to support assessment of clinical and translational research outcomes that measure impact (both in the clinical and community setting) beyond traditional citations in academic journals/bibliometric activities. The TSBM framework outlines more than 30 different facets of impact and can provide a basis for operationalizing broad impacts of research for translational and clinical scientists. Engagement science offers methods and modalities to work with individual stakeholders, and collaborators in a team science model, and engagement with external scholars and society. This article will describe the use of the TSBM framework and engagement science strategies to develop a translational dissemination framework with novel components for evaluation of dissemination and implementation activities. We propose using the translational dissemination framework to guide the development of an educational curriculum for the clinical research workforce. We outline the educational domains and proposed evaluation criteria essential in implementing this innovative translational dissemination educational content for the clinical and translational research workforce.