Implementing nudges for suicide prevention in real-world environments: project INSPIRE study protocol

Davis, Martha F.; Wolk, Courtney Benjamin; Jager‐Hyman, Shari; Beidas, Rinad S.; Young, Jami F.; Mautone, Jennifer A.; Buttenheim, Alison M.; Mandell, David S.; Volpp, Kevin G.; Wislocki, Katherine; Futterer, Anne; Marx, David E.; Dieckmeyer, Emily; Becker‐Haimes, Emily M.

doi:10.1186/s40814-020-00686-y

Cited by 13 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Additionally, rapid cycle prototyping methods (Dopp et al, 2019) that allow for learning quickly and failing fast offer promise. For example, a study that involves developing cross-sector strategies for implementing screening, assessment, and safety planning for individuals at risk for suicide across adult and pediatric primary care and outpatient mental health settings (Davis et al, 2020) is currently exploring the potential of these approaches. In this project, we have specifically developed trainings, resources, and opportunities for behavioral rehearsal and consultation for clinicians from primary care and behavioral health backgrounds and regardless of context to speed dissemination.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementing evidence-based practices in nonspecialty mental health settings.

Wolk¹,

Arnold²,

Proctor³

2022

Families, Systems, & Health

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Mental health services are often implemented in settings in which mental health is not the primary mission. Schools, primary care clinics, criminal justice and child welfare institutions, and senior centers have been increasingly adding mental health care to their compendium of services owing to the high rates of mental health needs in these settings. Despite numerous challenges to implementing mental health practices in settings where mental health care has not traditionally been a part of the service model, the demand for mental health services in these settings is growing. Implementation science offers a lens through which to understand unique challenges and potential solutions to implementing mental health services in these settings, with the ultimate goal of ensuring the implementation of evidence-based services. Method and Results: In this conceptual article, we discuss common overarching barriers to implementing evidence-based mental health interventions in nonspecialty mental health settings, such as workforce challenges, competing priorities, and financial considerations. Then, using examples from schools and primary care, we elucidate unique contextual considerations and implementation challenges in these settings. Finally, we articulate a research agenda for advancing implementation of evidence-based practices in nonspecialty mental health including highlighting promising implementation strategies (e.g., task shifting, adaptation) and the most relevant implementation outcomes to assess in these contexts (e.g., appropriateness, feasibility). Conclusions: Given that nonspecialty mental health settings deliver a large proportion of mental health care to traditionally underserved populations, there are important public health implications to advancing research in this area and ensuring implemented services are evidence-based.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementing evidence-based practices in nonspecialty mental health settings.

Wolk¹,

Arnold²,

Proctor³

2022

Families, Systems, & Health

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Questions of uncertainty are the basis for well-defined problems and aims of PFS. These can include understanding researchers' access to the population of interest (recruitment); acceptability of randomization (for certain study designs); developing, refining, and finalizing intervention protocols; acceptability of the intervention for the target population; intervention deliverers and other key personnel; and other feasibility-related outcomes including fidelity, cost, equity, and cultural appropriateness [70,[84][85][86][87].…”

Section: Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consolidated guidance for behavioral intervention pilot and feasibility studies

Pfledderer,

von Klinggraeff,

Burkart

et al. 2024

Pilot Feasibility Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background In the behavioral sciences, conducting pilot and/or feasibility studies (PFS) is a key step that provides essential information used to inform the design, conduct, and implementation of a larger-scale trial. There are more than 160 published guidelines, reporting checklists, frameworks, and recommendations related to PFS. All of these publications offer some form of guidance on PFS, but many focus on one or a few topics. This makes it difficult for researchers wanting to gain a broader understanding of all the relevant and important aspects of PFS and requires them to seek out multiple sources of information, which increases the risk of missing key considerations to incorporate into their PFS. The purpose of this study was to develop a consolidated set of considerations for the design, conduct, implementation, and reporting of PFS for interventions conducted in the behavioral sciences. Methods To develop this consolidation, we undertook a review of the published guidance on PFS in combination with expert consensus (via a Delphi study) from the authors who wrote such guidance to inform the identified considerations. A total of 161 PFS-related guidelines, checklists, frameworks, and recommendations were identified via a review of recently published behavioral intervention PFS and backward/forward citation tracking of a well-known PFS literature (e.g., CONSORT Ext. for PFS). Authors of all 161 PFS publications were invited to complete a three-round Delphi survey, which was used to guide the creation of a consolidated list of considerations to guide the design, conduct, and reporting of PFS conducted by researchers in the behavioral sciences. Results A total of 496 authors were invited to take part in the three-round Delphi survey (round 1, N = 46; round 2, N = 24; round 3, N = 22). A set of twenty considerations, broadly categorized into six themes (intervention design, study design, conduct of trial, implementation of intervention, statistical analysis, and reporting) were generated from a review of the 161 PFS-related publications as well as a synthesis of feedback from the three-round Delphi process. These 20 considerations are presented alongside a supporting narrative for each consideration as well as a crosswalk of all 161 publications aligned with each consideration for further reading. Conclusion We leveraged expert opinion from researchers who have published PFS-related guidelines, checklists, frameworks, and recommendations on a wide range of topics and distilled this knowledge into a valuable and universal resource for researchers conducting PFS. Researchers may use these considerations alongside the previously published literature to guide decisions about all aspects of PFS, with the hope of creating and disseminating interventions with broad public health impact.

show abstract

“…While they discuss meta-laboratories for advancing research on audit and feedback, the same principles can be applied to advance other aspects of implementation science, including the identification of implementation determinants. For instance, our research group is engaging in a collaborative project involving two health systems to identify common and unique determinants of suicide prevention practices across primary care and specialty mental health ( Davis et al., 2020 ). This kind of work can produce generalizable knowledge that may accelerate the deployment of EBPs across settings.…”

Section: A Call For Collaborationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Refining contextual inquiry to maximize generalizability and accelerate the implementation process

Davis

Beidas

2021

Implementation Research and Practice

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: While contextual inquiry, or in-depth mixed-methods work to study the implementation context, is critical for understanding the setting in which a behavioral health evidence-based practice (EBP) will be implemented, current methods to determine potential barriers and facilitators to implementation are often conducted in a single setting and/or for a single EBP per study, often taking 1–2 years to complete. To maximize generalizability and reduce the research-to-practice gap efficiently, it is important to move toward cross-sector and/or cross-EBP contextual inquiry. Methods: In this viewpoint, we argue for (a) collaborative research studies that seek to identify determinants of implementation that are similar and unique across different settings and EBPs, using rapid approaches when possible; (b) enhanced synthesis of existing research on implementation determinants to minimize duplication of contextual inquiry efforts; and (c) clear rationale for why additional in-depth or rapid contextual inquiry is needed before it is conducted. Throughout this viewpoint, the need to balance scientific rigor and speed are considered. Conclusions: Overall, this viewpoint seeks to encourage researchers to consolidate and share knowledge on barriers and facilitators to implementation to prepare for the scaling out of much needed implementation strategies and interventions for improving health. Plain language summary: Significant time and resources are often devoted to understanding what makes it easier or harder to use best practices for behavioral health concerns in health care settings. The goal of the current viewpoint is to offer ways to streamline this process so that high-quality behavioral health services can reach the patients that need them more quickly. In particular, we advocate for ways to share knowledge among researchers and learn from prior findings to more efficiently identify what makes it easier or harder to use best practices for addressing behavioral health problems in a given setting (e.g., primary care, schools, specialty mental health).

show abstract

Implementing nudges for suicide prevention in real-world environments: project INSPIRE study protocol

Cited by 13 publications

References 55 publications

Implementing evidence-based practices in nonspecialty mental health settings.

Implementing evidence-based practices in nonspecialty mental health settings.

Consolidated guidance for behavioral intervention pilot and feasibility studies

Refining contextual inquiry to maximize generalizability and accelerate the implementation process

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About