Implementation beyond the clinic: Community-driven utilization of research evidence from PC CARES, a suicide prevention program.
Implementation beyond the clinic: Community-driven utilization of research evidence from PC CARES, a suicide prevention program.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/ajcp.12609
复制
发表时间：
2022-12
影响因子：
3.1
通讯作者：
McEachern, Diane
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
White, Lauren A.;Wexler, Lisa;Weaver, Addie;Moto, Roberta;Kirk, Tanya;Rataj, Suzanne;Trout, Lucas;McEachern, Diane
关键词：
虽然研究的实施和传播是一个快速增长的领域，但人们如何、为什么以及在什么条件下整合和利用研究证据的关键问题仍然存在。这项混合方法的研究调查了促进社区对话关于研究结束自杀（PC CARES）的参与者如何理解和使用关于自杀预防的研究证据。PC CARES是一项健康干预措施，通过一系列社区学习圈，解决阿拉斯加农村地区对文化敏感的自杀预防做法的需求。我们分析了PC CARES成绩单和调查376名15岁以上的参与者在10个阿拉斯加西北部的土著村庄。定量分析显示，五个研究证据利用（URE）因素与参与者使用PC CARES学习圈研究证据的意图之间存在显着相关性。学习圈成绩单的关键定性主题扩展了这些URE结构，包括导航不一致的信息，集中关系，和土著世界观作为解释研究证据的关键。我们整合和组织我们的研究结果，为研究实施综合框架中的两个领域提供信息：（1）干预特征和（2）个人特征，重点是与社区环境最相关的研究结果，在社区环境中，自我决定，循证行动对于解决卫生不公平问题尤为重要。优先考虑当地需求和背景是在社区环境中实施有证据支持的做法的关键。关于社区驱动的实施如何改善吸收和促进健康公平的研究有限。本研究使用CFIR框架来评估社区环境中社区驱动的研究证据利用。定量数据显示了URE和参与者根据研究证据采取行动的意图之间的相关性。定性研究结果描述了参与者如何理解和计划使用所提供的研究证据。
While implementation and dissemination of research is a rapidly growing area, critical questions remain about how, why, and under what conditions everyday people integrate and utilize research evidence. This mixed‐methods study investigates how participants of Promoting Community Conversations About Research to End Suicide (PC CARES) make sense of and use research evidence about suicide prevention in their own lives. PC CARES is a health intervention addressing the need for culturally responsive suicide prevention practices in rural Alaska through a series of community Learning Circles. We analyzed PC CARES transcripts and surveys for 376 participants aged 15+ across 10 Northwest Alaska Native villages. Quantitative analysis showed significant correlations between five utilization of research evidence (URE) factors and participants' intent to use research evidence from PC CARES Learning Circles. Key qualitative themes from Learning Circle transcripts expanded upon these URE constructs and included navigating discordant information, centering relationships, and Indigenous worldviews as key to interpreting research evidence. We integrate and organize our findings to inform two domains from the Consolidated Framework for Research Implementation: (1) intervention characteristics and (2) characteristics of individuals, with emphasis on findings most relevant for community settings where self‐determined, evidence‐informed action is especially important for addressing health inequities. Prioritizing local needs and contexts is key for implementing evidence‐supported practices in community settings. There is limited research on how community‐driven implementation may improve uptake and advance health equity. This study uses CFIR framework to assess community‐driven utilization of research evidence in community settings. Quantitative data shows correlations between URE and participants' intentions to act on research evidence. Qualitative findings describe how participants make meaning and plan to use presented research evidence.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
2.3
作者：
Ramanadhan, Shoba;Davis, Melinda M.;Brownson, Ross C.
通讯作者：
Brownson, Ross C.
DOI：
10.1186/1748-5908-4-50
发表时间：
2009-08-07
期刊：
Implementation science : IS
影响因子：
--
作者：
Damschroder LJ;Aron DC;Keith RE;Kirsh SR;Alexander JA;Lowery JC
通讯作者：
Lowery JC
影响因子：
3.2
作者：
Fraser, Sarah L.;Geoffroy, Dominique;Kirmayer, Laurence J.
通讯作者：
Kirmayer, Laurence J.
影响因子：
12.7
作者：
Glasgow, Russell E.;Vinson, Cynthia;Hunter, Christine
通讯作者：
Hunter, Christine
影响因子：
1.3
作者：
Pufall, Erica L.;Jones, Andria Q.;Edge, Victoria L.
通讯作者：
Edge, Victoria L.