PDF(Sci-hub)
Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: Practice-based research holds potential as a promising solution to closing the research-practice gap, because it addresses research questions based on problems that arise in clinical practice and tests whether systems and interventions are effective and sustainable in a clinical setting. One type of practice-based research involves capturing practice by collecting evidence within clinical settings to evaluate the effectiveness of current practices. Here, we describe our collaboration between researchers and clinicians that sought to answer clinician-driven questions about community-based language interventions for young children (Are our interventions effective? What predicts response to our interventions?) and to address questions about the characteristics, strengths, and challenges of engaging in practice-based research.
UNASSIGNED: We performed a retrospective chart review of 59 young children who had participated in three group language interventions at one publicly funded community clinic between 2012 and 2017. Change on the Focus on the Outcomes of Communication Under Six (FOCUS), a government mandated communicative participation measure, was extracted as the main outcome measure. Potential predictors of growth during intervention were also extracted from the charts, including type of intervention received, attendance, age at the start of intervention, functional communication ability pre-intervention, and time between pre- and post-intervention FOCUS scores.
UNASSIGNED: Overall, 49% of children demonstrated meaningful clinical change on the FOCUS after their participation in the language groups. Only 3% of participants showed possibly meaningful clinical change, while the remaining 46% of participants demonstrated not likely meaningful clinical change. There were no significant predictors of communicative participation growth during intervention.
UNASSIGNED: Using a practice-based research approach aimed at capturing current practice, we were able to answer questions about the effectiveness of interventions delivered in real-world settings and learn about factors that do not appear to influence growth during these interventions. We also learned about benefits associated with engaging in practice-based research, including high clinical motivation, high external validity, and minimal time/cost investment. Challenges identified were helpful in informing our future efforts to examine other possible predictors through development of a new, clinically feasible checklist, and to pursue methods for improving collection of outcome data in the clinical setting.Implications: Clinicians and researchers can successfully collaborate to answer clinically informed research questions while considering realistic clinical practice and using research-informed methods and principles. Practice-based research partnerships between researchers and clinicians are both valuable and feasible.
UNASSIGNED: We performed a retrospective chart review of 59 young children who had participated in three group language interventions at one publicly funded community clinic between 2012 and 2017. Change on the Focus on the Outcomes of Communication Under Six (FOCUS), a government mandated communicative participation measure, was extracted as the main outcome measure. Potential predictors of growth during intervention were also extracted from the charts, including type of intervention received, attendance, age at the start of intervention, functional communication ability pre-intervention, and time between pre- and post-intervention FOCUS scores.
UNASSIGNED: Overall, 49% of children demonstrated meaningful clinical change on the FOCUS after their participation in the language groups. Only 3% of participants showed possibly meaningful clinical change, while the remaining 46% of participants demonstrated not likely meaningful clinical change. There were no significant predictors of communicative participation growth during intervention.
UNASSIGNED: Using a practice-based research approach aimed at capturing current practice, we were able to answer questions about the effectiveness of interventions delivered in real-world settings and learn about factors that do not appear to influence growth during these interventions. We also learned about benefits associated with engaging in practice-based research, including high clinical motivation, high external validity, and minimal time/cost investment. Challenges identified were helpful in informing our future efforts to examine other possible predictors through development of a new, clinically feasible checklist, and to pursue methods for improving collection of outcome data in the clinical setting.Implications: Clinicians and researchers can successfully collaborate to answer clinically informed research questions while considering realistic clinical practice and using research-informed methods and principles. Practice-based research partnerships between researchers and clinicians are both valuable and feasible.
摘要：
UNASSIGNED：基于实践的研究具有潜力，可以作为缩小研究与实践差距的有希望的解决方案，因为它解决了基于临床实践中出现的问题的研究问题，并测试了系统和干预措施在临床环境中是否有效和可持续。一种基于实践的研究涉及通过在临床环境中收集证据来捕获实践，以评估当前实践的有效性。这里,我们描述了我们在研究人员和临床医生之间的合作，旨在回答临床医生驱动的关于基于社区的幼儿语言干预的问题（我们的干预措施有效吗？什么可以预测我们的干预措施的反应？）并解决有关特征的问题，优势,以及从事基于实践的研究的挑战。
UNASSIGNED：我们对2012年至2017年间在一家公共资助的社区诊所参加过3组语言干预的59名幼儿进行了回顾性图表回顾。对六岁以下沟通结果的关注变化(FOCUS)，政府授权的沟通参与措施，被提取为主要结果衡量标准。从图表中还提取了干预期间增长的潜在预测因子，包括接受的干预类型，出席,干预开始时的年龄，功能沟通能力预干预，以及干预前后FOCUS评分之间的时间。
未经评估：总的来说，49％的儿童在参与语言组后在FOCUS上表现出有意义的临床变化。只有3%的参与者表现出可能有意义的临床变化，而其余46%的参与者表现出不太可能有意义的临床改变。干预期间交流参与增长没有显著预测因素。
UNASSIGNED：使用基于实践的研究方法，旨在捕捉当前的实践，我们能够回答有关在现实环境中实施的干预措施的有效性的问题,并了解在这些干预措施期间似乎不会影响生长的因素.我们还了解了与从事基于实践的研究相关的好处，包括高临床动机，外部效度高，和最小的时间/成本投资。确定的挑战有助于通知我们未来的努力，通过开发新的，临床上可行的检查表，并寻求改善临床结局数据收集的方法。含义：临床医生和研究人员可以成功地合作回答临床知情的研究问题，同时考虑现实的临床实践并使用研究知情的方法和原则。研究人员和临床医生之间基于实践的研究伙伴关系既有价值又可行。
UNASSIGNED：我们对2012年至2017年间在一家公共资助的社区诊所参加过3组语言干预的59名幼儿进行了回顾性图表回顾。对六岁以下沟通结果的关注变化(FOCUS)，政府授权的沟通参与措施，被提取为主要结果衡量标准。从图表中还提取了干预期间增长的潜在预测因子，包括接受的干预类型，出席,干预开始时的年龄，功能沟通能力预干预，以及干预前后FOCUS评分之间的时间。
未经评估：总的来说，49％的儿童在参与语言组后在FOCUS上表现出有意义的临床变化。只有3%的参与者表现出可能有意义的临床变化，而其余46%的参与者表现出不太可能有意义的临床改变。干预期间交流参与增长没有显著预测因素。
UNASSIGNED：使用基于实践的研究方法，旨在捕捉当前的实践，我们能够回答有关在现实环境中实施的干预措施的有效性的问题,并了解在这些干预措施期间似乎不会影响生长的因素.我们还了解了与从事基于实践的研究相关的好处，包括高临床动机，外部效度高，和最小的时间/成本投资。确定的挑战有助于通知我们未来的努力，通过开发新的，临床上可行的检查表，并寻求改善临床结局数据收集的方法。含义：临床医生和研究人员可以成功地合作回答临床知情的研究问题，同时考虑现实的临床实践并使用研究知情的方法和原则。研究人员和临床医生之间基于实践的研究伙伴关系既有价值又可行。
