Development and psychometric evaluation of the Implementation Science Research Project Appraisal Criteria (ImpResPAC) tool: a study protocol

被引:3
作者
Sweetnam, Chloe [1 ]
Goulding, Lucy [2 ]
Davis, Rachel E. [2 ]
Khadjesari, Zarnie [3 ]
Boaz, Annette [4 ]
Healey, Andy [2 ,5 ]
Sevdalis, Nick [2 ]
Bakolis, Ioannis [2 ,6 ]
Hull, Louise [2 ]
机构
[1] Icahn Sch Med Mt Sinai, Neurol, New York, NY 10029 USA
[2] Kings Coll London, Ctr Implementat Sci, Hlth Serv & Populat Res Dept, London, England
[3] Univ East Anglia, Sch Hlth Sci, Behav & Implementat Sci Res Grp, Norwich, England
[4] London Sch Hyg & Trop Med, Dept Hlth Serv Res & Policy, London, England
[5] Kings Coll London, Inst Psychiat Psychol & Neurosci, Kings Hlth Econ, London, England
[6] Kings Coll London, Inst Psychiat Psychol & Neurosci, Dept Biostat & Hlth Informat, London, England
来源
BMJ OPEN | 2022年 / 12卷 / 12期
基金
英国惠康基金;
关键词
Protocols & guidelines; Quality in health care; Organisation of health services; International health services; DISSEMINATION; CHECKLIST; QUALITY; DESIGNS; HEALTH; CARE;
D O I
10.1136/bmjopen-2022-061209
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
IntroductionThe need for quantitative criteria to appraise the quality of implementation research has recently been highlighted to improve methodological rigour. The Implementation Science Research development (ImpRes) tool and supplementary guide provide methodological guidance and recommendations on how to design high-quality implementation research. This protocol reports on the development of the Implementation Science Research Project Appraisal Criteria (ImpResPAC) tool, a quantitative appraisal tool, developed based on the structure and content of the ImpRes tool and supplementary guide, to evaluate the conceptual and methodological quality of implementation research.Methods and analysisThis study employs a three-stage sequential mixed-methods design. During stage 1, the research team will map core domains of the ImpRes tool, guidance and recommendations contained in the supplementary guide and within the literature, to ImpResPAC. In stage 2, an international multidisciplinary expert group, recruited through purposive sampling, will inform the refinement of ImpResPAC, including content, scoring system and user instructions. In stage 3, an extensive psychometric evaluation of ImpResPAC, that was created in stage 1 and refined in stage 2, will be conducted. The scaling assumptions (inter-item and item-total correlations), reliability (internal consistency, inter-rater) and validity (construct and convergent validity) will be investigated by applying ImpResPAC to 50 protocols published in Implementation Science. We envisage developing ImpResPAC in this way will provide implementation research stakeholders, primarily grant reviewers and educators, a comprehensive, transparent and fair appraisal of the conceptual and methodological quality of implementation research, increasing the likelihood of funding research that will generate knowledge and contribute to the advancement of the field.Ethics and disseminationThis study will involve human participants. This study has been registered and minimal risk ethical clearance granted by The Research Ethics Office, King's College London (reference number MRA-20/21-20807). Participants will receive written information on the study via email and will provide e-consent if they wish to participate. We will use traditional academic modalities of dissemination (eg, conferences and publications).
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 36 条
  • [21] Implementation outcome assessment instruments used in physical healthcare settings and their measurement properties: a systematic review protocol
    Khadjesari, Zarnie
    Vitoratou, Silia
    Sevdalis, Nick
    Hull, Louise
    [J]. BMJ OPEN, 2017, 7 (10):
  • [22] Outcomes for implementation science: an enhanced systematic review of instruments using evidence-based rating criteria
    Lewis, Cara C.
    Fischer, Sarah
    Weiner, Bryan J.
    Stanick, Cameo
    Kim, Mimi
    Martinez, Ruben G.
    [J]. IMPLEMENTATION SCIENCE, 2015, 10
  • [23] Letting Go: Conceptualizing Intervention De-implementation in Public Health and Social Service Settings
    McKay, Virginia R.
    Morshed, Alexandra B.
    Brownson, Ross C.
    Proctor, Enola K.
    Prusaczyk, Beth
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY PSYCHOLOGY, 2018, 62 (1-2) : 189 - 202
  • [24] Minimum Sample Size Recommendations for Conducting Factor Analyses
    Mundfrom, Daniel J.
    Shaw, Dale G.
    Ke, Tian Lu
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TESTING, 2005, 5 (02) : 159 - 168
  • [25] Mapping the growing discipline of dissemination and implementation science in health
    Norton, Wynne E.
    Lungeanu, Alina
    Chambers, David A.
    Contractor, Noshir
    [J]. SCIENTOMETRICS, 2017, 112 (03) : 1367 - 1390
  • [26] Does the CONSORT checklist improve the quality of reports of randomised controlled trials? A systematic review
    Plint, Amy C.
    Moher, David
    Morrison, Andra
    Schulz, Kenneth
    Altman, Douglas G.
    Hill, Catherine
    Gaboury, Isabelle
    [J]. MEDICAL JOURNAL OF AUSTRALIA, 2006, 185 (05) : 263 - 267
  • [27] Methods to Improve the Selection and Tailoring of Implementation Strategies
    Powell, Byron J.
    Beidas, Rinad S.
    Lewis, Cara C.
    Aarons, Gregory A.
    McMillen, J. Curtis
    Proctor, Enola K.
    Mandell, David S.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF BEHAVIORAL HEALTH SERVICES & RESEARCH, 2017, 44 (02) : 177 - 194
  • [28] A refined compilation of implementation strategies: results from the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) project
    Powell, Byron J.
    Waltz, Thomas J.
    Chinman, Matthew J.
    Damschroder, Laura J.
    Smith, Jeffrey L.
    Matthieu, Monica M.
    Proctor, Enola K.
    Kirchner, JoAnn E.
    [J]. IMPLEMENTATION SCIENCE, 2015, 10
  • [29] A Compilation of Strategies for Implementing Clinical Innovations in Health and Mental Health
    Powell, Byron J.
    McMillen, J. Curtis
    Proctor, Enola K.
    Carpenter, Christopher R.
    Griffey, Richard T.
    Bunger, Alicia C.
    Glass, Joseph E.
    York, Jennifer L.
    [J]. MEDICAL CARE RESEARCH AND REVIEW, 2012, 69 (02) : 123 - 157
  • [30] Outcomes for Implementation Research: Conceptual Distinctions, Measurement Challenges, and Research Agenda
    Proctor, Enola
    Silmere, Hiie
    Raghavan, Ramesh
    Hovmand, Peter
    Aarons, Greg
    Bunger, Alicia
    Griffey, Richard
    Hensley, Melissa
    [J]. ADMINISTRATION AND POLICY IN MENTAL HEALTH AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, 2011, 38 (02) : 65 - 76