Role of State Mental Health Leaders in Supporting Evidence-Based Practices over Time

Jones, Amanda M.; Bond, Gary R.; Peterson, Alison E.; Drake, Robert E.; McHugo, Gregory J.; Williams, Jessica R.

doi:10.1007/s11414-013-9358-7

Cited by 17 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For the empirical articles, we chose a maximum variation sampling approach based on the subject matter and article topic with an initial sample of 10% of the articles. We also noted that nine of the articles related to a large, multiyear national implementation study [27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35]. Because this was the largest and most comprehensive account of the role of policy in large-scale implementation efforts identified through our search, we included these as a sub-group for data extraction.…”

Section: Search Results and Article Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding the implementation of evidence-informed policies and practices from a policy perspective: a critical interpretive synthesis

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The fields of implementation science and knowledge translation have evolved somewhat independently from the field of policy implementation research, despite calls for better integration. As a result, implementation theory and empirical work do not often reflect the implementation experience from a policy lens nor benefit from the scholarship in all three fields. This means policymakers, researchers, and practitioners may find it challenging to draw from theory that adequately reflects their implementation efforts. Methods We developed an integrated theoretical framework of the implementation process from a policy perspective by combining findings from these fields using the critical interpretive synthesis method. We began with the compass question: How is policy currently described in implementation theory and processes and what aspects of policy are important for implementation success? We then searched 12 databases as well as gray literature and supplemented these documents with other sources to fill conceptual gaps. Using a grounded and interpretive approach to analysis, we built the framework constructs, drawing largely from the theoretical literature and then tested and refined the framework using empirical literature. Results A total of 11,434 documents were retrieved and assessed for eligibility and 35 additional documents were identified through other sources. Eighty-six unique documents were ultimately included in the analysis. Our findings indicate that policy is described as (1) the context, (2) a focusing lens, (3) the innovation itself, (4) a lever of influence, (5) an enabler/facilitator or barrier, or (6) an outcome. Policy actors were also identified as important participants or leaders of implementation. Our analysis led to the development of a two-part conceptual framework, including process and determinant components. Conclusions This framework begins to bridge the divide between disciplines and provides a new perspective about implementation processes at the systems level. It offers researchers, policymakers, and implementers a new way of thinking about implementation that better integrates policy considerations and can be used for planning or evaluating implementation efforts.

show abstract

Section: Search Results and Article Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding the implementation of evidence-informed policies and practices from a policy perspective: a critical interpretive synthesis

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We also noted that nine of the articles related to a large, multi-year national implementation study, focusing on the state-level activities and outcomes. (27)(28)(29)(30)(31)(32)(33)(34)(35) Because this was the largest and most comprehensive account of the role of policy in large-scale implementation efforts identi ed through our search, we included these as a sub-group for data extraction. This approach led to data extraction for 34 empirical articles.…”

Section: Search Results and Article Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding the implementation of evidence-informed policies and practices from a policy perspective: a critical interpretive synthesis

Bullock

Lavis

Wilson

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The fields of implementation science and knowledge translation have evolved somewhat independently from the field of policy implementation research, despite calls for better integration. As a result, implementation theory and empirical work do not often reflect the implementation experience from a policy lens nor benefit from the scholarship in all three fields. This means policy-makers, researchers and practitioners may find it challenging to draw from theory that adequately reflects their implementation efforts.Methods: We developed an integrated theoretical framework of the implementation process from a policy perspective by combining findings from these fields using the critical interpretive synthesis method. We began with the compass question: how is policy currently described in implementation theory and processes and what aspects of policy are important for implementation success? We then searched 12 databases as well as grey literature and supplemented these documents with other sources to fill conceptual gaps. Using a grounded and interpretive approach to analysis, we built the framework constructs, drawing largely from the theoretical literature and then tested and refined the framework using empirical literature.Results: A total of 7850 documents were retrieved and assessed for eligibility and 34 additional documents were identified through other sources. Eighty-two unique documents were ultimately included in the analysis. Our findings indicate that policy is described as: 1) the context; 2) a focusing lens; 3) the innovation itself; 4) a lever of influence; 5) an enabler/facilitator or barrier; or 6) an outcome. Policy actors were also identified as important participants or leaders of implementation. Our analysis led to the development of a two-part conceptual framework, including process and determinant components. Conclusions: This framework begins to bridge the divide between disciplines and offers a new way of thinking about implementation processes at the systems level. It offers researchers, policy-makers and implementers with a new way of thinking about implementation and can be used for planning or evaluating implementation efforts.

show abstract

“…For the empirical articles, we chose a maximum variation sampling approach based on the subject matter and article topic with an initial sample of 10% of the articles. We also noted that nine of the articles related to a large, multi-year national implementation study (27)(28)(29)(30)(31)(32)(33)(34)(35). Because this was the largest and most comprehensive account of the role of policy in large-scale implementation efforts identi ed through our search, we included these as a sub-group for data extraction.…”

Section: Search Results and Article Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…"evidence-informed practice*" "knowledge mobili*" "action plan" procedures manual scope of practice "evidence-informed policy" "evidence-based policy" * also included in conceptual **9 articles described individually in subsequent rows Centralization/decentralization of policy authority (e.g., creating a regional infrastructure with some policy authority to oversee implementation) Accountability of the state sector's role in implementation (e.g., develop system-wide performance indicators or targets, monitor performance and fidelity, evaluate, report results publicly, consider enforcement strategies) Leadership for implementation (through the appointment of state sector leaders, dedicated resources, garnering support for innovation and its implementation) Stewardship of the non-state sector's role in implementation (e.g., constructing formal opportunities for non-state sector in oversight of implementation; contracting with non-state sector for implementationrelated activities; fostering networks and linkages across different types of organizations who are engaged in implementation) (7, 12, 27-31, 37, 54, 55, 64, 102) Funding system infrastructure (financial arrangement) Dedicate resources for system infrastructure to support implementation (e.g., intermediaries, technical assistance centres, backbone organizations, facilitators, etc.) Create funding sources that align with time needed for effective implementation and scaling (9,27,28,31,32,35,64,69,86,89,90,96,99,102,103) Re-designing system to meet needs (delivery arrangement and implementationrelated supports)…”

Section: Authors' Contributionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding the implementation of evidence-informed policies and practices from a policy perspective: a critical interpretive synthesis

Bullock

Lavis

Wilson

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The fields of implementation science and knowledge translation have evolved somewhat independently from the field of policy implementation research, despite calls for better integration. As a result, implementation theory and empirical work do not often reflect the implementation experience from a policy lens nor benefit from the scholarship in all three fields. This means policymakers, researchers and practitioners may find it challenging to draw from theory that adequately reflects their implementation efforts.Methods: We developed an integrated theoretical framework of the implementation process from a policy perspective by combining findings from these fields using the critical interpretive synthesis method. We began with the compass question: how is policy currently described in implementation theory and processes and what aspects of policy are important for implementation success? We then searched 12 databases as well as grey literature and supplemented these documents with other sources to fill conceptual gaps. Using a grounded and interpretive approach to analysis, we built the framework constructs, drawing largely from the theoretical literature and then tested and refined the framework using empirical literature.Results: A total of 11,434 documents were retrieved and assessed for eligibility and 35 additional documents were identified through other sources. Eighty-six unique documents were ultimately included in the analysis. Our findings indicate that policy is described as: 1) the context; 2) a focusing lens; 3) the innovation itself; 4) a lever of influence; 5) an enabler/facilitator or barrier; or 6) an outcome. Policy actors were also identified as important participants or leaders of implementation. Our analysis led to the development of a two-part conceptual framework, including process and determinant components. Conclusions: This framework begins to bridge the divide between disciplines and offers a new way of thinking about implementation processes at the systems level. It offers researchers, policymakers and implementers with a new way of thinking about implementation and can be used for planning or evaluating implementation efforts.

show abstract

Role of State Mental Health Leaders in Supporting Evidence-Based Practices over Time

Cited by 17 publications

References 13 publications

Understanding the implementation of evidence-informed policies and practices from a policy perspective: a critical interpretive synthesis

Understanding the implementation of evidence-informed policies and practices from a policy perspective: a critical interpretive synthesis

Understanding the implementation of evidence-informed policies and practices from a policy perspective: a critical interpretive synthesis

Understanding the implementation of evidence-informed policies and practices from a policy perspective: a critical interpretive synthesis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About