Advancing Implementation Science through Measure Development and Evaluation

 描述（由申请人提供）：质量差和不切实际的测量阻碍了对促进广泛提供循证护理和改善心理健康所需的实施障碍、促进因素和策略的研究。衡量标准可产生研究和政策/实践见解，指导随后的决策。然而，对于促进科学和为实践提供信息的措施，它们需要在心理测量上强大和务实。没有研究评估了一系列广泛的心理测量特性，这些测量是在高引用率的基础实施科学框架中描述的，如实施研究综合框架（CFIR）4或实施成果框架（IOF）5。现有的唯一实用标准是在没有利益相关者参与的情况下产生的。我们的长期目标是制定一套全面的可靠、有效和务实的措施，供研究人员和利益相关者用于推进实施的科学和实践。本申请的首要目标是提出一个以测量为重点的实施科学研究议程（即，这些结构具有心理测量学上的强大和实用的措施，需要进一步发展）以及完成这项工作的措施和方法。三个目标指导这项建议。第一，建立一个由股东驱动的务实措施的可操作化，并制定可靠的，有效的评级标准来评估结构。我们的方法，以产生“务实”的评级标准采用混合方法（文献综述，定性访谈，Q排序和德尔菲方法），使利益相关者。第二，制定可靠、有效和务实的可接受性、适当性和可行性措施.我们已经审查了一个有效的开发程序，以建立其可靠性;实质性，判别内容，结构，已知的群体，和预测效度;结构不变性;和变化的敏感性。我们的方法来开发和测试新的措施，包括一系列的实验室研究，以评估心理测量性能在受控条件下和实地研究，以衡量心理测量和语用性能在“真实的世界”的条件下。第三，确定CFIR和IOF相关的措施，表现出心理测量和务实的力量。我们的方法来评估超过420现有的措施46个结构建立在我们的初步研究，并访问一个既定的工作队。实用措施评级标准将被整合到我们建立的心理测量评级标准，使心理测量和实用措施配置文件。我们预测，很少有现有的措施是心理测量的声音和务实的，但严格的，可复制的开发和测试程序将产生的措施，拥有这些品质。一旦确定了务实的、心理测量上强有力的措施，该领域就可以产生关于哪些实施战略最有效、何时有效以及对谁有效的强大科学知识，以便利益攸关方可以使用循证方法来实施循证实践。

 DESCRIPTION (provided by applicant): Poor quality and impractical measurement has impeded the study of implementation barriers, facilitators and strategies necessary for promoting widespread delivery of evidence-based care and improving mental health. Measures derive research and policy/practice insights that guide subsequent decision making. However, for measures to advance science and inform practice they need to be both psychometrically strong and pragmatic. No studies have evaluated the psychometric properties of a comprehensive array of measures delineated in highly-cited, foundational implementation science frameworks such as the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) 4 or the Implementation Outcomes Framework (IOF).5 Moreover, no research has attempted to advance pragmatic implementation science measures, and the only existing pragmatic criteria was generated in the absence of stakeholder involvement. Our long-term goal is to develop a comprehensive battery of reliable, valid, and pragmatic measures that researchers and stakeholders could use to advance the science and practice of implementation. The overarching objective of this application is to put forth a measurement-focused research agenda for implementation science (i.e., which constructs possess psychometrically strong and pragmatic measures, which require further development) as well as measures and methods to accomplish this work. Three aims guide this proposal. One, establish a stakeholder-driven operationalization of pragmatic measures and develop reliable, valid rating criteria for assessing the construct. Our approach to generating "pragmatic" rating criteria employs mixed methods (literature review, qualitative interviews, and Q-sort and Delphi methods) to engage stakeholders. Two, develop reliable, valid, and pragmatic measures of accept- ability, appropriateness, and feasibility. We have vetted an effective development procedure to establish their reliability; substantive, discriminant content, structural, known-groups, and predictive validity; structural invariance; and sensitivity to change. Our approach to developing and testing new measures involves a series of laboratory studies to assess psychometric properties under controlled conditions and field studies to gauge psychometric and pragmatic performance under "real world" conditions. Three, identify CFIR and IOF-linked measures that demonstrate both psychometric and pragmatic strength. Our approach to assessing over 420 existing measures of 46 constructs builds upon our preliminary studies and accesses an established task force. The pragmatic measure rating criteria will be integrated into our established psychometric rating criteria rendering psychometric and pragmatic measure profiles. We predict that few existing measures are psycho- metrically sound and pragmatic, but that rigorous, replicable development and testing procedures will generate measures that possess these qualities. Once pragmatic, psychometrically strong measures are identified, the field can generate robust scientific knowledge about which implementation strategies work best, when, and for whom so that stakeholders can use evidence-based approaches for implementing evidence-based practices.