Cargando…
Measuring capacity to use evidence-based interventions in community-based organizations: A comprehensive, scoping review
INTRODUCTION: Community-based organizations (CBOs) are well-positioned to incorporate research evidence, local expertise, and contextual factors to address health inequities. However, insufficient capacity limits use of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) in these settings. Capacity-building impleme...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Cambridge University Press
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9389281/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36003212 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2022.426 |
_version_ | 1784770409264054272 |
---|---|
author | Ramanadhan, Shoba Mahtani, Sitara L. Kirk, Shinelle Lee, Michelle Weese, Maggie Mita, Carol Brandt, Heather M. |
author_facet | Ramanadhan, Shoba Mahtani, Sitara L. Kirk, Shinelle Lee, Michelle Weese, Maggie Mita, Carol Brandt, Heather M. |
author_sort | Ramanadhan, Shoba |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Community-based organizations (CBOs) are well-positioned to incorporate research evidence, local expertise, and contextual factors to address health inequities. However, insufficient capacity limits use of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) in these settings. Capacity-building implementation strategies are popular, but a lack of standard models and validated measures hinders progress in the field. To advance the literature, we conducted a comprehensive scoping review. METHODS: With a reference librarian, we executed a comprehensive search strategy of PubMed/Medline, Web of Science Core Collection, and EBSCO Global Health. We included articles that addressed implementation science, capacity-building, and CBOs. Of 5527 articles, 99 met our inclusion criteria, and we extracted data using a double-coding process RESULTS: Of the 99 articles, 47% defined capacity explicitly, 31% defined it indirectly, and 21% did not define it. Common concepts in definitions were skills, knowledge/expertise, and resources. Of the 57 articles with quantitative analysis, 48 (82%) measured capacity, and 11 (23%) offered psychometric data for the capacity measures. Of the 99 studies, 40% focused exclusively on populations experiencing inequities and 22% included those populations to some extent. The bulk of the studies came from high-income countries. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation scientists should 1) be explicit about models and definitions of capacity and strategies for building capacity, 2) specify expected multi-level implementation outcomes, 3) develop and use validated measures for quantitative work, and 4) integrate equity considerations into the conceptualization and measurement of capacity-building efforts. With these refinements, we can ensure that the necessary supports reach CBO practitioners and critical partners for addressing health inequities. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9389281 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Cambridge University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-93892812022-08-23 Measuring capacity to use evidence-based interventions in community-based organizations: A comprehensive, scoping review Ramanadhan, Shoba Mahtani, Sitara L. Kirk, Shinelle Lee, Michelle Weese, Maggie Mita, Carol Brandt, Heather M. J Clin Transl Sci Research Article INTRODUCTION: Community-based organizations (CBOs) are well-positioned to incorporate research evidence, local expertise, and contextual factors to address health inequities. However, insufficient capacity limits use of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) in these settings. Capacity-building implementation strategies are popular, but a lack of standard models and validated measures hinders progress in the field. To advance the literature, we conducted a comprehensive scoping review. METHODS: With a reference librarian, we executed a comprehensive search strategy of PubMed/Medline, Web of Science Core Collection, and EBSCO Global Health. We included articles that addressed implementation science, capacity-building, and CBOs. Of 5527 articles, 99 met our inclusion criteria, and we extracted data using a double-coding process RESULTS: Of the 99 articles, 47% defined capacity explicitly, 31% defined it indirectly, and 21% did not define it. Common concepts in definitions were skills, knowledge/expertise, and resources. Of the 57 articles with quantitative analysis, 48 (82%) measured capacity, and 11 (23%) offered psychometric data for the capacity measures. Of the 99 studies, 40% focused exclusively on populations experiencing inequities and 22% included those populations to some extent. The bulk of the studies came from high-income countries. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation scientists should 1) be explicit about models and definitions of capacity and strategies for building capacity, 2) specify expected multi-level implementation outcomes, 3) develop and use validated measures for quantitative work, and 4) integrate equity considerations into the conceptualization and measurement of capacity-building efforts. With these refinements, we can ensure that the necessary supports reach CBO practitioners and critical partners for addressing health inequities. Cambridge University Press 2022-07-11 /pmc/articles/PMC9389281/ /pubmed/36003212 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2022.426 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Ramanadhan, Shoba Mahtani, Sitara L. Kirk, Shinelle Lee, Michelle Weese, Maggie Mita, Carol Brandt, Heather M. Measuring capacity to use evidence-based interventions in community-based organizations: A comprehensive, scoping review |
title | Measuring capacity to use evidence-based interventions in community-based organizations: A comprehensive, scoping review |
title_full | Measuring capacity to use evidence-based interventions in community-based organizations: A comprehensive, scoping review |
title_fullStr | Measuring capacity to use evidence-based interventions in community-based organizations: A comprehensive, scoping review |
title_full_unstemmed | Measuring capacity to use evidence-based interventions in community-based organizations: A comprehensive, scoping review |
title_short | Measuring capacity to use evidence-based interventions in community-based organizations: A comprehensive, scoping review |
title_sort | measuring capacity to use evidence-based interventions in community-based organizations: a comprehensive, scoping review |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9389281/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36003212 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2022.426 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ramanadhanshoba measuringcapacitytouseevidencebasedinterventionsincommunitybasedorganizationsacomprehensivescopingreview AT mahtanisitaral measuringcapacitytouseevidencebasedinterventionsincommunitybasedorganizationsacomprehensivescopingreview AT kirkshinelle measuringcapacitytouseevidencebasedinterventionsincommunitybasedorganizationsacomprehensivescopingreview AT leemichelle measuringcapacitytouseevidencebasedinterventionsincommunitybasedorganizationsacomprehensivescopingreview AT weesemaggie measuringcapacitytouseevidencebasedinterventionsincommunitybasedorganizationsacomprehensivescopingreview AT mitacarol measuringcapacitytouseevidencebasedinterventionsincommunitybasedorganizationsacomprehensivescopingreview AT brandtheatherm measuringcapacitytouseevidencebasedinterventionsincommunitybasedorganizationsacomprehensivescopingreview |