Cargando…
Fidelity is not easy! Challenges and guidelines for assessing fidelity in complex interventions
BACKGROUND: Fidelity in complex behavioural interventions is underexplored and few comprehensive or detailed fidelity studies report on specific procedures for monitoring fidelity. Using Bellg’s popular Treatment Fidelity model, this paper aims to increase understanding of how to practically and com...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8164256/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34051830 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-021-05322-5 |
_version_ | 1783701077817819136 |
---|---|
author | Ginsburg, Liane R. Hoben, Matthias Easterbrook, Adam Anderson, Ruth A. Estabrooks, Carole A. Norton, Peter G. |
author_facet | Ginsburg, Liane R. Hoben, Matthias Easterbrook, Adam Anderson, Ruth A. Estabrooks, Carole A. Norton, Peter G. |
author_sort | Ginsburg, Liane R. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Fidelity in complex behavioural interventions is underexplored and few comprehensive or detailed fidelity studies report on specific procedures for monitoring fidelity. Using Bellg’s popular Treatment Fidelity model, this paper aims to increase understanding of how to practically and comprehensively assess fidelity in complex, group-level, interventions. APPROACH AND LESSONS LEARNED: Drawing on our experience using a mixed methods approach to assess fidelity in the INFORM study (Improving Nursing home care through Feedback On perfoRMance data—INFORM), we report on challenges and adaptations experienced with our fidelity assessment approach and lessons learned. Six fidelity assessment challenges were identified: (1) the need to develop succinct tools to measure fidelity given tools tend to be intervention specific, (2) determining which components of fidelity (delivery, receipt, enactment) to emphasize, (3) unit of analysis considerations in group-level interventions, (4) missing data problems, (5) how to respond to and treat fidelity ‘failures’ and ‘deviations’ and lack of an overall fidelity assessment scheme, and (6) ensuring fidelity assessment doesn’t threaten internal validity. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS: Six guidelines, primarily applicable to group-level studies of complex interventions, are described to help address conceptual, methodological, and practical challenges with fidelity assessment in pragmatic trials. The current study offers guidance to researchers regarding key practical, methodological, and conceptual challenges associated with assessing fidelity in pragmatic trials. Greater attention to fidelity assessment and publication of fidelity results through detailed studies such as this one is critical for improving the quality of fidelity studies and, ultimately, the utility of published trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02695836. Registered on February 24, 2016 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-021-05322-5. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8164256 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81642562021-06-01 Fidelity is not easy! Challenges and guidelines for assessing fidelity in complex interventions Ginsburg, Liane R. Hoben, Matthias Easterbrook, Adam Anderson, Ruth A. Estabrooks, Carole A. Norton, Peter G. Trials Methodology BACKGROUND: Fidelity in complex behavioural interventions is underexplored and few comprehensive or detailed fidelity studies report on specific procedures for monitoring fidelity. Using Bellg’s popular Treatment Fidelity model, this paper aims to increase understanding of how to practically and comprehensively assess fidelity in complex, group-level, interventions. APPROACH AND LESSONS LEARNED: Drawing on our experience using a mixed methods approach to assess fidelity in the INFORM study (Improving Nursing home care through Feedback On perfoRMance data—INFORM), we report on challenges and adaptations experienced with our fidelity assessment approach and lessons learned. Six fidelity assessment challenges were identified: (1) the need to develop succinct tools to measure fidelity given tools tend to be intervention specific, (2) determining which components of fidelity (delivery, receipt, enactment) to emphasize, (3) unit of analysis considerations in group-level interventions, (4) missing data problems, (5) how to respond to and treat fidelity ‘failures’ and ‘deviations’ and lack of an overall fidelity assessment scheme, and (6) ensuring fidelity assessment doesn’t threaten internal validity. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS: Six guidelines, primarily applicable to group-level studies of complex interventions, are described to help address conceptual, methodological, and practical challenges with fidelity assessment in pragmatic trials. The current study offers guidance to researchers regarding key practical, methodological, and conceptual challenges associated with assessing fidelity in pragmatic trials. Greater attention to fidelity assessment and publication of fidelity results through detailed studies such as this one is critical for improving the quality of fidelity studies and, ultimately, the utility of published trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02695836. Registered on February 24, 2016 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-021-05322-5. BioMed Central 2021-05-29 /pmc/articles/PMC8164256/ /pubmed/34051830 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-021-05322-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Methodology Ginsburg, Liane R. Hoben, Matthias Easterbrook, Adam Anderson, Ruth A. Estabrooks, Carole A. Norton, Peter G. Fidelity is not easy! Challenges and guidelines for assessing fidelity in complex interventions |
title | Fidelity is not easy! Challenges and guidelines for assessing fidelity in complex interventions |
title_full | Fidelity is not easy! Challenges and guidelines for assessing fidelity in complex interventions |
title_fullStr | Fidelity is not easy! Challenges and guidelines for assessing fidelity in complex interventions |
title_full_unstemmed | Fidelity is not easy! Challenges and guidelines for assessing fidelity in complex interventions |
title_short | Fidelity is not easy! Challenges and guidelines for assessing fidelity in complex interventions |
title_sort | fidelity is not easy! challenges and guidelines for assessing fidelity in complex interventions |
topic | Methodology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8164256/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34051830 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-021-05322-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ginsburglianer fidelityisnoteasychallengesandguidelinesforassessingfidelityincomplexinterventions AT hobenmatthias fidelityisnoteasychallengesandguidelinesforassessingfidelityincomplexinterventions AT easterbrookadam fidelityisnoteasychallengesandguidelinesforassessingfidelityincomplexinterventions AT andersonrutha fidelityisnoteasychallengesandguidelinesforassessingfidelityincomplexinterventions AT estabrookscarolea fidelityisnoteasychallengesandguidelinesforassessingfidelityincomplexinterventions AT nortonpeterg fidelityisnoteasychallengesandguidelinesforassessingfidelityincomplexinterventions |