An Australian Example of Translating Psychological Research into Practice and Policy: Where We are and Where We Need to Go

A scoping review of outer context constructs in dissemination and implementation science theories, models, and frameworks

Many studies have explored organizational factors that facilitate implementation. However, there is still a limited understanding of determinants external to the implementing organization and their effects on evidence-based intervention (EBI) adoption, implementation, and outcomes. The purpose of this scoping review was to assess definitions of context and identify salient determinants of outer context found in dissemination and implementation theories, models, and frameworks. We employed a compilation of dissemination and implementation frameworks from two reviews as the data source. We abstracted the following information: type of article, outcomes of the framework, presence of a context definition, presence of any outer setting definition and the definition, number and domains of outer setting mentioned, definitions of outer context constructs, and any quantitative measures of outer setting. We identified 19 definitions of outer context. Forty-seven (49%) frameworks reported one or more specific constructs of the outer setting. While the outer context domains described in the frameworks varied, the most common domains were policy (n = 24), community (n = 20), partnerships (n = 13), and communications (n = 12). Based on our review of the frameworks, more conceptualization and measurement development for outer context domains are needed. Few measures were found and definitions of domains varied across frameworks. Expanding outer context construct definitions would advance measure development for important factors external to the organizations related to EBI implementation.

Saving Lives: A Systematic Review on the Efficacy of Theory-Informed Suicide Prevention Programs

Suicide is a global epidemic. This review assessed the scope and effectiveness of suicide prevention programs. Systematic literature searches were conducted using PsycINFO, ERIC and MEDLINE to retrieve articles published between January 2007 and March 2017 and fulfilled inclusion criteria (studies evaluating the efficacy of theory/model-informed suicide prevention programs in increasing participant knowledge or skills when presented with a peer at risk of suicide). The review is informed by PRISMA guidelines. Of 1398 studies identified, 25 were reviewed and most: targeted professionals; were 1-4-day workshops; were underpinned by 21 different theories; taught less detail to the community than professionals; and improved target outcomes. Current programs, although effective, are limited by their inaccessibility, narrow content for the community and substantial variability in theory base. Future suicide prevention programs will benefit from being informed by a more specific theory, delivered through technology, targeting more of the community and improving methodological rigour.

Enhancing Community Suicide Risk Assessment and Protective Intervention Action Plans Through a Bystander Intervention Model-Informed Video

Aim: The effects of a bystander intervention model (BIM)-informed intervention (video) for the general community on participant risk of suicide assessment ability (ROSAA) and protective intervention ability (PIA) were compared with an active control (non-BIM-informed video). Method: Video interventions with 628 participants (M_age = 47.99, SD_age = 17.34, range = 18-85 years) were conducted online. ROSAA and PIA were assessed immediately preintervention, postintervention, and at 2 months follow-up (n = 126). Results: Linear mixed model analyses indicated that the experimental and control conditions improved on both outcome variables postintervention/Time 2 (T2); however, the former yielded better outcomes than the latter (moderate ESs in both variables). Follow-up/Time 3 (T3) experimental ROSAA scores were higher than Time 1 (T1) and lower than T2 scores. Follow-up experimental PIA scores were higher than T1 and lower than T2 scores. Follow-up control ROSAA scores were higher than those of T1 and similar to T2. Follow-up control PIA scores were similar to T1 and T2 scores. Limitations: Limitations of the study include: sample homogeneity, small n at follow-up, self-report data only (no observable behavior was tested), fair inter-rater reliability, and a brief follow-up time frame. Conclusion: Current community information increased ROSAA and PIA. A BIM-informed intervention significantly enhanced these effects, which seemed to wane somewhat over time with the effect being lower at follow-up compared with postintervention. The BIM should be explored further as a basis for community suicide prevention interventions.

Identification of knowledge translation theories, models or frameworks suitable for health technology reassessment: a survey of international experts

OBJECTIVE

Health technology reassessment (HTR) is a field focused on managing a technology throughout its life cycle for optimal use. The process results in one of four possible recommendations: increase use, decrease use, no change or complete withdrawal of the technology. However, implementation of these recommendations has been challenging. This paper explores knowledge translation (KT) theories, models and frameworks (TMFs) and their suitability for implementation of HTR recommendations.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey.

PARTICIPANTS

Purposeful sampling of international KT and HTR experts was administered between January and March 2019.

METHODS

Sixteen full-spectrum KT TMFs were rated by the experts as 'yes', 'partially yes' or 'no' on six criteria: familiarity, logical consistency/plausibility, degree of specificity, accessibility, ease of use and HTR suitability. Consensus was determined as a rating of ≥70% responding 'yes'. Descriptive statistics and manifest content analysis were conducted on open-ended comments.

RESULTS

Eleven HTR and 11 KT experts from Canada, USA, UK, Australia, Germany, Spain, Italy and Sweden participated. Of the 16 KT TMFs, none received ≥70% rating. When ratings of 'yes' and 'partially yes' were combined, the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was considered the most suitable KT TMF by both KT and HTR experts (86%). One additional KT TMF was selected by KT experts: Knowledge to Action framework. HTR experts selected two additional KT TMFs: Co-KT framework and Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle. Experts identified three key characteristics of a KT TMF that may be important to consider: practicality, guidance on implementation and KT TMF adaptability.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite not reaching an overall ≥70% rating on any of the KT TMFs, experts identified four KT TMFs suitable for HTR. Users may apply these KT TMFs in the implementation of HTR recommendations. In addition, KT TMF characteristics relevant to the field of HTR need to be explored further.

A scoping review of full-spectrum knowledge translation theories, models, and frameworks

Background

Application of knowledge translation (KT) theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs) is one method for successfully incorporating evidence into clinical care. However, there are multiple KT TMFs and little guidance on which to select. This study sought to identify and describe available full-spectrum KT TMFs to subsequently guide users.

Methods

A scoping review was completed. Articles were identified through searches within electronic databases, previous reviews, grey literature, and consultation with KT experts. Search terms included combinations of KT terms and theory-related terms. Included citations had to describe full-spectrum KT TMFs that had been applied or tested. Titles/abstracts and full-text articles were screened independently by two investigators. Each KT TMF was described by its characteristics including name, context, key components, how it was used, primary target audience, levels of use, and study outcomes. Each KT TMF was also categorized into theoretical approaches as process models, determinant frameworks, classic theories, implementation theories, and evaluation frameworks. Within each category, KT TMFs were compared and contrasted to identify similarities and unique characteristics.

Results

Electronic searches yielded 7160 citations. Additional citations were identified from previous reviews (n = 41) and bibliographies of included full-text articles (n = 6). Thirty-six citations describing 36 full-spectrum were identified. In 24 KT TMFs, the primary target audience was multi-level including patients/public, professionals, organizational, and financial/regulatory. The majority of the KT TMFs were used within public health, followed by research (organizational, translation, health), or in multiple contexts. Twenty-six could be used at the individual, organization, or policy levels, five at the individual/organization levels, three at the individual level only, and two at the organizational/policy level. Categorization of the KT TMFs resulted in 18 process models, eight classic theories, three determinant frameworks, three evaluation frameworks, and four that fit more than one category. There were no KT TMFs that fit the implementation theory category. Within each category, similarities and unique characteristics emerged through comparison.

Conclusions

A systematic compilation of existing full-spectrum KT TMFs, categorization into different approaches, and comparison has been provided in a user-friendly way. This list provides options for users to select from when designing KT projects and interventions.

Trial registration

A protocol outlining the methodology of this scoping review was developed and registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018088564).