Cargando…
Implementation outcome assessment instruments used in physical healthcare settings and their measurement properties: a systematic review protocol
INTRODUCTION: Over the past 10 years, research into methods that promote the uptake, implementation and sustainability of evidence-based interventions has gathered pace. However, implementation outcomes are defined in different ways and assessed by different measures; the extent to which these measu...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5640043/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28993392 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017972 |
_version_ | 1783270976788627456 |
---|---|
author | Khadjesari, Zarnie Vitoratou, Silia Sevdalis, Nick Hull, Louise |
author_facet | Khadjesari, Zarnie Vitoratou, Silia Sevdalis, Nick Hull, Louise |
author_sort | Khadjesari, Zarnie |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Over the past 10 years, research into methods that promote the uptake, implementation and sustainability of evidence-based interventions has gathered pace. However, implementation outcomes are defined in different ways and assessed by different measures; the extent to which these measures are valid and reliable is unknown. The aim of this systematic review is to identify and appraise studies that assess the measurement properties of quantitative implementation outcome instruments used in physical healthcare settings, to advance the use of precise and accurate measures. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The following databases will be searched from inception to March 2017: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library. Grey literature will be sought via HMIC, OpenGrey, ProQuest for theses and Web of Science Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science. Reference lists of included studies and relevant reviews will be hand searched. Three search strings will be combined to identify eligible studies: (1) implementation literature, (2) implementation outcomes and (3) measurement properties. Screening of titles, abstracts and full papers will be assessed for eligibility by two reviewers independently and any discrepancies resolved via consensus with the wider team. The methodological quality of the studies will be assessed using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments checklist. A set of bespoke criteria to determine the quality of the instruments will be used, and the relationship between instrument usability and quality will be explored. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not necessary for systematic review protocols. Researchers and healthcare professionals can use the findings of this systematic review to guide the selection of implementation outcomes instruments, based on their psychometric quality, to assess the impact of their implementation efforts. The findings will also provide a useful guide for reviewers of papers and grants to determine the psychometric quality of the measures used in implementation research. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO): CRD42017065348. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5640043 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-56400432017-10-19 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 BMJ Open Research Methods INTRODUCTION: Over the past 10 years, research into methods that promote the uptake, implementation and sustainability of evidence-based interventions has gathered pace. However, implementation outcomes are defined in different ways and assessed by different measures; the extent to which these measures are valid and reliable is unknown. The aim of this systematic review is to identify and appraise studies that assess the measurement properties of quantitative implementation outcome instruments used in physical healthcare settings, to advance the use of precise and accurate measures. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The following databases will be searched from inception to March 2017: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library. Grey literature will be sought via HMIC, OpenGrey, ProQuest for theses and Web of Science Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science. Reference lists of included studies and relevant reviews will be hand searched. Three search strings will be combined to identify eligible studies: (1) implementation literature, (2) implementation outcomes and (3) measurement properties. Screening of titles, abstracts and full papers will be assessed for eligibility by two reviewers independently and any discrepancies resolved via consensus with the wider team. The methodological quality of the studies will be assessed using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments checklist. A set of bespoke criteria to determine the quality of the instruments will be used, and the relationship between instrument usability and quality will be explored. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not necessary for systematic review protocols. Researchers and healthcare professionals can use the findings of this systematic review to guide the selection of implementation outcomes instruments, based on their psychometric quality, to assess the impact of their implementation efforts. The findings will also provide a useful guide for reviewers of papers and grants to determine the psychometric quality of the measures used in implementation research. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO): CRD42017065348. BMJ Publishing Group 2017-10-08 /pmc/articles/PMC5640043/ /pubmed/28993392 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017972 Text en © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted. This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ |
spellingShingle | Research Methods Khadjesari, Zarnie Vitoratou, Silia Sevdalis, Nick Hull, Louise Implementation outcome assessment instruments used in physical healthcare settings and their measurement properties: a systematic review protocol |
title | Implementation outcome assessment instruments used in physical healthcare settings and their measurement properties: a systematic review protocol |
title_full | Implementation outcome assessment instruments used in physical healthcare settings and their measurement properties: a systematic review protocol |
title_fullStr | Implementation outcome assessment instruments used in physical healthcare settings and their measurement properties: a systematic review protocol |
title_full_unstemmed | Implementation outcome assessment instruments used in physical healthcare settings and their measurement properties: a systematic review protocol |
title_short | Implementation outcome assessment instruments used in physical healthcare settings and their measurement properties: a systematic review protocol |
title_sort | implementation outcome assessment instruments used in physical healthcare settings and their measurement properties: a systematic review protocol |
topic | Research Methods |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5640043/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28993392 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017972 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT khadjesarizarnie implementationoutcomeassessmentinstrumentsusedinphysicalhealthcaresettingsandtheirmeasurementpropertiesasystematicreviewprotocol AT vitoratousilia implementationoutcomeassessmentinstrumentsusedinphysicalhealthcaresettingsandtheirmeasurementpropertiesasystematicreviewprotocol AT sevdalisnick implementationoutcomeassessmentinstrumentsusedinphysicalhealthcaresettingsandtheirmeasurementpropertiesasystematicreviewprotocol AT hulllouise implementationoutcomeassessmentinstrumentsusedinphysicalhealthcaresettingsandtheirmeasurementpropertiesasystematicreviewprotocol |