A scoping study of frameworks for adapting public health evidence-based interventions

Abstract

Evidence-based public health translation of research to practice is essential to improve the public's health. Dissemination and implementation researchers have explored what happens once practitioners adopt evidence-based interventions (EBIs) and have developed models and frameworks to describe the adaptation process. This scoping study identified and summarized adaptation frameworks in published reports and grey literature. We followed the recommended steps of a scoping study: (a) identifying the research question; (b) identifying relevant studies; (c) selecting studies; (d) charting the data; (e) collating, summarizing, and reporting the results; and (f) consulting with experts. We searched PubMed, PsycINFO, PsycNET, and CINAHL databases for articles referencing adaptation frameworks for public health interventions in the published and gray literature, and from reference lists of framework articles. Two reviewers independently coded the frameworks and their steps and identified common steps. We found 13 adaptation frameworks with 11 program adaptation steps: (a) assess community, (b) understand the EBI(s), (c) select the EBI, (d) consult with experts, (e) consult with stakeholders, (f) decide on needed adaptations, (g) adapt the original EBI, (h) train staff, (i) test the adapted materials, (j) implement the adapted EBI, and (k) evaluate. Eight of these steps were recommended by more than five frameworks: #1-3, 6-7, and 9-11. This study is the first to systematically identify, review, describe, and summarize frameworks for adapting EBIs. It contributes to the literature by consolidating key steps in program adaptation of EBIs and describing the associated tasks in each step.

Iterative Decision‐making for Evaluation of Adaptations (IDEA): A decision tree for balancing adaptation, fidelity, and intervention impact

“…To that end, a fast‐developing body of research has aimed to provide guidance for adapting EBPs (Bernal & Domenech Rodríguez, ; Bumbarger & Kerns, ; Ferrer‐Wreder, Sundell, & Mansoory, ). A recent review suggested important similarities and differences across proposed frameworks for such adaptations (Escoffery et al, ). In deciding what components of an EBP require adaptation, some frameworks emphasized understanding and preserving core elements (e.g., Rolleri et al, ), whereas others prioritized improving the fit between the intervention and target population.…”

“…In deciding what components of an EBP require adaptation, some frameworks emphasized understanding and preserving core elements (e.g., Rolleri et al, ), whereas others prioritized improving the fit between the intervention and target population. In consolidating their review results, Escoffery et al () concluded that existing adaptation frameworks contained some combination of up to 11 distinct steps, including (but not limited to) selection of the EBP in question; consultation with experts and/or stakeholders; pilot testing of the modified EBP; and eventual full‐scale implementation and testing.…”

Depression self-management in people with epilepsy: Adapting project UPLIFT for underserved populations

“…The aim of this manuscript was to describe the adaptation process of Project UPLIFT for Black and Hispanic PWE. The Adaptation framework outlined by Escoffery and colleagues [53] was generally followed and based on input from experts and stakeholders, each site implemented modifications. The MSM team found that no changes were necessary for the Project UPLIFT curriculum itself, however, recruitment language needed to be slightly modified for Black PWE.…”

“…In this adaptation process, both MSM and NYU learned that it was important to explore the need to adapt the program's curriculum but also to examine how best to deliver the proposed EBI in the new community. The review by Escoffery and colleagues [53] suggested common steps undertaken in the adaptation process for EBIs. In the current paper, the MSM and NYU teams described the processes from the point of intervention selection (step #3) through implementation and evaluation of the adapted EBIs (step #11).…”

Adaptation of public health initiatives: expert views on current guidance and opportunities to advance their application and benefit

“…This study aimed to: i) explore researchers' and practitioners' views on adaptation guidance as summarized in two recent scoping reviews by Escoffrey et al (2018) and Wang et al, (2018) [9,10], ii) identify potential improvements to increase the practicality of adaptation frameworks in real world settings and iii) identify future opportunities to advance the adaptation literature to achieve better public health outcomes.…”