The Role of Implementation Science in Behavioral Health

Massey, Oliver T.; Vroom, Enya B.

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-18435-3_5

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The field of implementation science has sought to bridge the gap between research and practice by outlining methods or activities that bolster and support the use of research findings and EBPs (Aarons et al, 2009b;Bauer et al, 2015;Fixsen et al, 2005;Massey & Vroom, 2020). The formation of the field of implementation science and its corresponding research is in response to evidence-based practices, models, and policies often failing to affect services that behavioral health professionals and organizations provide to clients, target populations, and communities (Dearing et al, 2018).…”

Section: Implementation Science and Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptualizing Implementation Practice Capacity in Community-Based Organizations Delivering Evidence-Based Behavioral Health Services

Vroom

Massey

Tyson

et al. 2021

Glob Implement Res Appl

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Due to the significant prevalence of mental and substance use disorders in the United States, the push for the development and implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs) in behavioral health has risen exponentially in the last 30 years. Community-based organizations (CBOs) (i.e., self-governing and/or not-for-profit) have been recognized as important providers of behavioral health services. However, there are gaps in the literature surrounding CBO implementation capacity-ability to adopt, implement, and sustain an EBP-and capacity training initiatives (e.g., training in data-based decision-making) that specifically target CBOs and implementation practice. The purpose of this exploratory study was to assess how individuals working within Florida CBOs conceptualize implementation practice capacity and what is needed to reach adequate capacity to utilize an EBP. This qualitative study consisted of semi-structured interviews with eight administrators and nine practitioners currently employed by CBOs who deliver evidence-based behavioral health services (N = 17). Results showed certain implementation practice characteristics such as leadership, culture/climate, collaboration/communication, data-based decision-making and evaluation, and funding were all important areas of implementation practice capacity. Implications for future research focused on conceptualizing and building implementation practice capacity within the context of community behavioral health settings will be discussed.

show abstract

Section: Implementation Science and Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptualizing Implementation Practice Capacity in Community-Based Organizations Delivering Evidence-Based Behavioral Health Services

Vroom

Massey

Tyson

et al. 2021

Glob Implement Res Appl

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Papers have outlined research agendas to expand the field of implementation science (IS) into the policy realm [7][8][9][10]. Some concerns about applying traditional implementation frameworks to health policymaking, raised by those inside and outside of IS, focus on the irreducible complexity and non-linearity of policymaking [11] and the prohibitive costs of implementing behavioral health innovations with the infrastructure required to maintain fidelity [12]. Translation is needed between evidence production and its use in policymaking [13], but there is very little discussion of the types of organizations already positioned to play this role in local, state, and national governments.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A landscape assessment of the activities and capacities of evidence-to-policy intermediaries (EPI) in behavioral health

Almquist

Walker

Purtle

2023

Implement Sci Commun

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background A significant gap exists between the production of research evidence and its use in behavioral health policymaking. Organizations providing consulting and support activities for improving policy represent a promising source for strengthening the infrastructure to address this gap. Understanding the characteristics and activities of these evidence-to-policy intermediary (EPI) organizations can inform the development of capacity-building activities, leading to strengthened evidence-to-policy infrastructure and more widespread evidence-based policymaking. Methods Online surveys were sent to 51 organizations from English-speaking countries involved in evidence-to-policy activities in behavioral health. The survey was grounded in a rapid evidence review of the academic literature regarding strategies used to influence research use in policymaking. The review identified 17 strategies, which were classified into four activity categories. We administered the surveys via Qualtrics and calculated the descriptive statistics, scales, and internal consistency statistics using R. Results A total of 31 individuals completed the surveys from 27 organizations (53% response rate) in four English-speaking countries. EPIs were evenly split between university (49%) and non-university (51%) settings. Nearly all EPIs conducted direct program support (mean = 4.19/5 [sd = 1.25]) and knowledge-building (4.03 [1.17]) activities. However, engagement with traditionally marginalized and non-traditional partners (2.84 [1.39]) and development of evidence reviews using formal critical appraisal methods (2.81 [1.70]) were uncommon. EPIs tend to be specialized, focusing on a group of highly related strategies rather than incorporating multiple evidence-to-policy strategies in their portfolios. Inter-item consistency was moderate to high, with scale α’s ranging from 0.67 to 0.85. Ratings of respondents’ willingness to pay for training in one of three evidence dissemination strategies revealed high interest in program and policy design. Conclusions Our results suggest that evidence-to-policy strategies are frequently used by existing EPIs; however, organizations tend to specialize rather than engage in a breadth of strategies. Furthermore, few organizations reported consistently engaging with non-traditional or community partners. Focusing on building capacity for a network of new and existing EPIs could be a promising strategy for growing the infrastructure needed for evidence-informed behavioral health policymaking.

show abstract

“…(7-10) Some concerns about applying traditional implementation frameworks to health policymaking, raised by those inside and outside of IS, focus on the irreducible complexity and nonlinearity of policymaking, (11) and the prohibitive costs of implementing behavioral health innovations with the infrastructure required to maintain delity. (12) Translation is needed between evidence production and its use in policymaking, (13) but there is very little discussion of the types of organizations already positioned to play this role in local, state, and national governments.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Landscape Assessment of the Activities and Capacities of Evidence to Policy Intermediaries (EPI) in Behavioral Health

Almquist

Walker

Purtle

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:A significant gap exists between the production of research evidence and its use in behavioral health policymaking. Organizations providing consulting and support activities for improving policy represent a promising source for strengthening the infrastructure to address this gap. Understanding the characteristics and activities of these evidence-to-policy intermediary (EPI) organizations can inform the development of capacity-building activities, leading to strengthened evidence-to-policy infrastructure and more widespread evidence-based policymaking.Methods:Online surveys were sent to 51 organizations from English-speaking countries involved in evidence-to-policy activities in behavioral health. The survey was grounded in a rapid evidence review of the academic literature regarding strategies used to influence research use in policymaking. The review identified 17 strategies, which were classified into four activity categories. We administered the surveys via Qualtrics and calculated descriptive statistics, scales, and internal consistency statistics using R.Results:A total of 31 individuals completed surveys from 27 organizations (53% response rate) in four English-speaking countries. EPIs were evenly split between university (49%) and non-university settings (51%). Nearly all EPIs conducted direct program support (mean=4.19/5 [sd=1.25]) and knowledge-building (4.03 [1.17]) activities. However, engagement with traditionally marginalized and nontraditional partners (2.84 [1.39]) and development of evidence reviews using formal critical appraisal methods (2.81 [1.70]) were uncommon.EPIs tend to be specialized, focusing on a group of highly related strategies rather than incorporating multiple evidence-to-policy strategies in their portfolios. Inter-item consistency was moderate to high, with scale α’s ranging from 0.67 to 0.85. Ratings of respondents’ willingness to pay for training in one of three evidence dissemination strategies revealed high interest in program and policy design.Conclusions:Our results suggests that evidence-to-policy strategies are frequently used by existing EPIs; however, organizations tend to specialize rather than engage a breadth of strategies. Further, few organizations reported consistently engaging with non-traditional or community partners. Focusing on building capacity for a network of new and existing EPIs could be a promising strategy for growing the infrastructure needed for evidence-informed behavioral health policymaking.

show abstract

The Role of Implementation Science in Behavioral Health

Cited by 6 publications

References 64 publications

Conceptualizing Implementation Practice Capacity in Community-Based Organizations Delivering Evidence-Based Behavioral Health Services

Conceptualizing Implementation Practice Capacity in Community-Based Organizations Delivering Evidence-Based Behavioral Health Services

A landscape assessment of the activities and capacities of evidence-to-policy intermediaries (EPI) in behavioral health

A Landscape Assessment of the Activities and Capacities of Evidence to Policy Intermediaries (EPI) in Behavioral Health

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About