Using qualitative comparative analysis to understand and quantify translation and implementation

Kane, Heather; Lewis, Megan A.; Williams, Pam; Kahwati, Leila C.

doi:10.1007/s13142-014-0251-6

Cited by 84 publications

(90 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…QCA is a set-theoretic method based on Boolean algebra that is increasingly used in sociological, management, and health services research to explore complex social phenomena [80, 81]. The primary benefit of QCA for the proposed research is the technique’s ability to identify conditions or combinations of conditions that are necessary vs. sufficient for agency investment in organizational supports for evidence use.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Organizational supports used by private child and family serving agencies to facilitate evidence use: a mixed methods study protocol

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundChallenges to evidence use are well documented. Less well understood are the formal supports—e.g., technical infrastructure, inter-organizational relationships—organizations may put in place to help overcome these challenges. This study will identify supports for evidence use currently used by private child and family serving agencies delivering publicly funded behavioral health and/or human services; examine contextual, organizational, and managerial factors associated with use of such supports; and determine how identified supports affect evidence use by staff at multiple levels of the organization.MethodsWe will use a sequential explanatory mixed methods design, with study activities occurring in two sequential phases: In phase 1, quantitative survey data collected from managers of private child and family serving agencies in six states (CA, IN, KY, MO, PA, and WI) and analyzed using both regression and qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) will identify organizational supports currently being used to facilitate evidence use and examine the contextual, organizational, and managerial factors associated with the use of such supports. In phase 2, data from phase 1 will be used to select a purposive sample of 12 agencies for in-depth case studies. In those 12 agencies, semi-structured interviews with key informants and managers, focus groups with frontline staff, and document analysis will provide further insight into agencies’ motivation for investing in organizational supports for evidence use and the facilitators and barriers encountered in doing so. Semi-structured interviews with managers and focus groups with frontline staff will also assess whether and how identified supports affect evidence use at different levels of the organization (senior executives, middle managers, frontline supervisors, and frontline staff). Within- and between-case analyses supplemented by QCA will identify combinations of factors associated with the highest and lowest levels of staff evidence use.DiscussionThis study will inform efforts to improve sustainment, scale-up, and spread of evidence by providing insight into organizational and managerial strategies that facilitate evidence use, the contexts in which these strategies are most effective, and their effect on evidence use by staff at different levels of the organization.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Organizational supports used by private child and family serving agencies to facilitate evidence use: a mixed methods study protocol

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Third, we used qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) to compare data from these diverse facilities. QCA is a method of comparing data from several case studies that allows one to identify multiple factors, and configurations of these factors, potentially associated with an outcome (Kane et al, ). We used fuzzy set QCA (fsQCA), a specific type of QCA, to explore how different combinations of these facility characteristics (termed “conditions”) were associated with perceived capability for implementing mental health counselling across the various PHC sites.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We used fuzzy set QCA (fsQCA), a specific type of QCA, to explore how different combinations of these facility characteristics (termed “conditions”) were associated with perceived capability for implementing mental health counselling across the various PHC sites. In contrast to crisp set QCA which treats the outcome as a dichotomous variable that is either in (1) or out (0) of the set, fuzzy set QCA treats the outcome as a continuous variable with values ranging between 0 (poor) and 1 (good), thereby allowing for a granulated understanding of perceived implementation capability (Backhans, Mosedale, Bruce, Whitehead, & Burstrom, ; Kane et al, ). To prepare the data for analysis, we calibrated it by assigning each facility (case) a value between 0 (completely out of the set) and 1 (completely in the set) for every condition and the outcome.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although a mixed‐methods approach that combines observations of health care with surveys and in‐depth interviews of health providers would generate rich data and provide opportunities to examine implementation preparedness using multiple sources, this approach is costly and was beyond the financial scope of this study which used a novel and cost‐effective evaluation method as a first step. This approach involved observations of primary care delivery that allowed us to observe staff and staff–patient interactions in a natural, non‐disruptive manner (Dixson‐Woods & Bosk, ) and qualitative comparative analysis for identifying factors potentially associated with implementation preparedness across diverse PHC facilities (Kane, Lewis, Williams, & Kahwati, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessing capability for implementing mental health counselling within primary care facilities in a middle‐income country: A feasibility study

Myers

Breuer

Lund

et al. 2019

Psychiatric Ment Health Nurs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accessible summary What is already known about this topic? Integrating mental health counselling into primary care services is a recommended strategy for reducing the mental health treatment gap in low‐ and middle‐income countries. To support this strategy, potential barriers to counselling integration must be identified and addressed. Organizational preparedness for implementation may influence the extent to which the introduction of counselling is successful. Features of primary care facilities associated with preparedness for the implementation of mental health counselling have not been explored. What the paper adds to existing knowledge? This study uses a novel approach to explore variations in preparedness of primary care services to implement counselling and factors potentially associated with these variations. Findings suggest there is considerable variation in the preparedness of facilities to implement counselling. Organizational factors such as resource availability, management style and facility environment are potentially associated with capability for implementing mental health counselling. What are the implications for practice? Health planners could use this method to identify poorly functioning services that may benefit from additional interventions to build preparedness for counselling implementation. Future research should examine whether differences in facility preparedness impact on the implementation and outcomes of this service. AbstractIntroductionDifferences in primary care facilities' preparedness for implementing mental health counselling may affect the implementation process but have rarely been studied.AimTo assess the feasibility of using a novel methodological approach to explore variations in capability for implementing mental health counselling and factors potentially associated with this variation among primary care services in the Western Cape, South Africa.MethodsStaff from 26 facilities participated in discussions about their facility's mental health implementation capability. Three researchers conducted observations of the facility's environment, staff–patient interactions and resources. We used qualitative comparative analysis to identify factors potentially associated with implementation capability.ResultsFacilities appeared to vary in their capability for implementing counselling services. The availability of person‐centred health services, a therapeutic environment and sufficient human resources may be requirements for implementation preparedness. Other factors that seem to support preparedness include the availability of confidential space for counselling and an adequately managed facility.DiscussionThis study identified several features of well‐functioning primary care facilities. Facilities with these features may be better prepared to implement a new counselling service.Implications for practiceThis method may identify facilities that are poorly prepared for implementation that could benefit from preparedness‐building interventions. Whether differences in p...

show abstract

“…18 Programs such as CPPW involve multiple components that may work together, and different program models can lead to success. This method accommodates the complexity associated with evaluating such programs.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pathways to Program Success: A Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) of Communities Putting Prevention to Work Case Study Programs

Kane

Hinnant

Day³

et al. 2017

Journal of Public Health Management and Practice

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To examine the elements of capacity, a measure of organizational resources supporting program implementation that result in successful completion of public health program objectives in a public health initiative serving 50 communities. Design We used crisp set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) to analyze case study and quantitative data collected during the evaluation of the Communities Putting Prevention to Work (CPPW) program. Setting CPPW awardee program staff and partners implemented evidence-based public health improvements in counties, cities, and organizations (eg, worksites, schools). Participants Data came from case studies of 22 CPPW awardee programs that implemented evidence-based, community-and organizational-level public health improvements. Intervention Program staff implemented a range of evidence-based public health improvements related to tobacco control and obesity prevention. Main Outcome Measure The outcome measure was completion of approximately 60% of work plan objectives. Results Analysis of the capacity conditions revealed 2 combinations for completing most work plan objectives: (1) having experience implementing public health improvements in combination with having a history of collaboration with partners; and (2) not having experience implementing public health improvements in combination with having leadership support. Conclusion Awardees have varying levels of capacity. The combinations identified in this analysis provide important insights into how awardees with different combinations of elements of capacity achieved most of their work plan objectives. Even when awardees lack some elements of capacity, they can build it through strategies such as hiring staff and engaging new partners with expertise. In some instances, lacking 1 or more elements of capacity did not prevent an awardee from successfully completing objectives. Implications for Policy & Practice These findings can help funders and practitioners recognize and assemble different aspects of capacity to achieve more successful programs; awardees can draw on extant organizational strengths to compensate when other aspects of capacity are absent.

show abstract

Using qualitative comparative analysis to understand and quantify translation and implementation

Cited by 84 publications

References 16 publications

Organizational supports used by private child and family serving agencies to facilitate evidence use: a mixed methods study protocol

Organizational supports used by private child and family serving agencies to facilitate evidence use: a mixed methods study protocol

Assessing capability for implementing mental health counselling within primary care facilities in a middle‐income country: A feasibility study

Pathways to Program Success: A Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) of Communities Putting Prevention to Work Case Study Programs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About