Application of group model building in implementation research: A systematic review of the public health and healthcare literature.
Application of group model building in implementation research: A systematic review of the public health and healthcare literature.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1371/journal.pone.0284765
复制
发表时间：
2023
期刊：
影响因子：
3.7
通讯作者：
Sabounchi, Nasim S.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Estrada-Magbanua, Weanne Myrrh;Huang, Terry T. -K.;Lounsbury, David W.;Zito, Priscila;Iftikhar, Pulwasha;El-Bassel, Nabila;Gilbert, Louisa;Wu, Elwin;Lee, Bruce Y.;Mateu-Gelabert, Pedro;Sabounchi, Nasim S.
小组模型构建是一个让利益相关者参与参与建模过程的过程，以了解他们对问题的看法，并探索有关复杂问题的起源，促成因素和潜在解决方案或干预措施的概念。最近，它已成为解决传统干预模式和框架无法完全解决的复杂，长期存在的公共卫生问题的一种新方法。然而，在何种程度上，群体模型的建设，导致采用循证实践，干预措施和公共卫生政策仍然在很大程度上没有研究。本系统综述的目的是研究文献中GMB的公共卫生和医疗保健应用，并概述其如何用于促进循证干预措施的实施和传播。我们检索了截至2022年8月的PubMed、Web of Science和其他数据库，以寻找与公共卫生或医疗保健相关的研究，其中GMB被引用为主要方法。我们没有排除基于语言、地点或出版日期的研究。三位评审员独立提取了关于GMB会话特征、模型属性以及传播格式和内容的数据。最终审查纳入了72项研究。GMB活动的主要领域为营养（n = 19，26.4%）、卫生保健管理（n = 15，20.8%）和环境健康（n = 12，16.7%），在美国（n = 29，40.3%）和澳大利亚（n = 7，9.7%）开展。23（31.9%）的研究报告说，绿色专线小巴影响实施政策的变化，干预措施的发展，和社区行动计划;不到三分之一的报告传播的模型以外的期刊出版物。据报道，绿色专线小巴增加了洞察力，促进共识，并促进利益相关者之间的沟通。GMB为参与者带来了实实在在的好处，包括增加社区参与和系统解决方案的开发。建议跨学科的利益相关者的参与和更严格的评估和宣传绿色专线小巴活动。
Group model building is a process of engaging stakeholders in a participatory modeling process to elicit their perceptions of a problem and explore concepts regarding the origin, contributing factors, and potential solutions or interventions to a complex issue. Recently, it has emerged as a novel method for tackling complex, long-standing public health issues that traditional intervention models and frameworks cannot fully address. However, the extent to which group model building has resulted in the adoption of evidence-based practices, interventions, and policies for public health remains largely unstudied. The goal of this systematic review was to examine the public health and healthcare applications of GMB in the literature and outline how it has been used to foster implementation and dissemination of evidence-based interventions. We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and other databases through August 2022 for studies related to public health or health care where GMB was cited as a main methodology. We did not eliminate studies based on language, location, or date of publication. Three reviewers independently extracted data on GMB session characteristics, model attributes, and dissemination formats and content. Seventy-two studies were included in the final review. Majority of GMB activities were in the fields of nutrition (n = 19, 26.4%), health care administration (n = 15, 20.8%), and environmental health (n = 12, 16.7%), and were conducted in the United States (n = 29, 40.3%) and Australia (n = 7, 9.7%). Twenty-three (31.9%) studies reported that GMB influenced implementation through policy change, intervention development, and community action plans; less than a third reported dissemination of the model outside journal publication. GMB was reported to have increased insight, facilitated consensus, and fostered communication among stakeholders. GMB is associated with tangible benefits to participants, including increased community engagement and development of systems solutions. Transdisciplinary stakeholder involvement and more rigorous evaluation and dissemination of GMB activities are recommended.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
1.4
作者：
Escobedo, Patricia;Gonzalez, Karina Dominguez;Bluthenthal, Ricky
通讯作者：
Bluthenthal, Ricky
影响因子：
3.7
作者：
Broekhuizen H;Ifeanyichi M;Cheelo M;Drury G;Pittalis C;Rouwette E;Mbambiko M;Kachimba J;Brugha R;Gajewski J;Bijlmakers L
通讯作者：
Bijlmakers L
影响因子：
8.9
作者：
Baker, Phillip;Brown, Andrew D.;Lawrence, Mark
通讯作者：
Lawrence, Mark
影响因子：
3
作者：
Biroscak, Brian J.;Schneider, Tali;Hovmand, Peter S.
通讯作者：
Hovmand, Peter S.
影响因子：
4.4
作者：
Atkinson, Jo-An;O'Donnell, Eloise;Rychetnik, Lucie
通讯作者：
Rychetnik, Lucie