BACKGROUND: Scaling effective primary care innovations to benefit more people is of interest to decision makers. However, we know little about how promising innovations are being scaled \"spontaneously,\" that is, without deliberate guidance.
OBJECTIVE: We aim to observe, document, and analyze how, in real-life conditions, 1 primary care innovation spontaneously scales up across Quebec, Canada.
METHODS: We will conduct a participative study using a descriptive single-case study. It will be guided by the McLean and Gargani principles for scaling and reported according to the COREQ (Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research) guidelines. Informed by an integrated knowledge translation approach, our steering committee will include patient users throughout the project. Inspired by the Quebec College of Family Physician\'s \"Dragons\' Den\" primary care program, we will identify a promising primary care innovation that is being or will be scaled spontaneously. We will interview the innovation team about their scaling experiences every month for 1 year. We will conduct interviews and focus groups with decision makers, health care providers, and end users in the innovation team and the target site about their experience of both scaling and receiving the scaled innovation and document meetings as nonparticipant observers. Interview transcripts and documentary data will be analyzed to (1) compare the spontaneous scaling plan and implementation with the McLean and Gargani principles for scaling and (2) determine how it was consistent with or diverged from the 4 McLean and Gargani guiding principles: justification, optimal scale, coordination, and dynamic evaluation.
RESULTS: This study was funded in March 2020 by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Recruitment began in November 2023 and data collection began in December 2023. Results are expected to be published in the first quarter of 2024.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study will advance the science of scaling by providing practical evidence-based material about scaling health and social care innovations in real-world settings using the 4 guiding principles of McLean and Gargani.
UNASSIGNED: PRR1-10.2196/54855.

BACKGROUND: Most asthma diagnoses and patient care take place in primary care settings. Electronic medical records (EMRs) offer an opportunity to utilize technology to improve asthma diagnosis and care. The purpose of this study was to create and validate separate case definitions for suspected and confirmed asthma in primary care EMRs, to enable surveillance, benchmarking, and quality improvement in primary care settings. The objective of this study was to develop a case definition for suspected and confirmed asthma for use in a primary care sentinel surveillance system.
METHODS: A single chart abstractor conducted a manual audit of 776 randomly selected patient charts from an academic primary care practice EMR in Kingston, Ontario. Following the single chart abstractor classification, a consensus on chart classification as \"not asthma\", \"suspected asthma\", or \"confirmed asthma\" was achieved between the abstractor, a family physician, and a respirologist using Canadian Thoracic Society (CTS) criteria. Case definition algorithms based on billing codes, clinical data elements and medications were applied to the site\'s Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network (CPCSSN) data for the same charts and compared to abstractor classifications to determine each algorithm\'s measurement properties.
RESULTS: The prevalence of suspected and confirmed asthma were 7.3% (n = 54) and 2.4% (n = 18), respectively. None of the proposed case definitions could differentiate between suspected and confirmed asthma. One algorithm consisting of billing, clinical, and medication elements had the highest Youden\'s Index for either suspected or confirmed asthma. The algorithm had a sensitivity of 81%, a specificity of 96%, positive predictive value of 71%, negative predictive value of 98%, and a Youden\'s Index of 0.77 for combined suspected or confirmed asthma cases.
CONCLUSIONS: An EMR case definition for suspected or confirmed adult asthma has been validated for use in CPCSSN. Implementation of this case definition will enable the development of a surveillance electronic tool (eTool) for adult asthma that can foster quality improvement.

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) is a primary cause of adult hospitalizations and imposes substantial burdens on patients and healthcare systems. Initiatives that support providers and patients in addressing needs at each stage of this illness are needed. The INSPIRED COPD Outreach Program™ was introduced in 2010 in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada to improve care for those with advanced COPD. The huge success of the program led to its expansion to various contexts and geographic locations through a pan-Canadian quality improvement collaborative (QIC). Our study explored early elements of program planning and practice with an aim to understand factors that influence program sustainability. We evaluated the implementation process of 19 teams across Canada; post-collaborative team reports, focus groups, interviews and self-ratings of progress were collected from all teams. Analysis of data revealed three phases important to fostering sustainability (facilitating implementation, keeping the momentum, and securing sustainability) and each phase had unique supporting themes. Not surprisingly, teams that planned for sustainability early in the implementation process were more likely to successfully achieve program sustainability. However, teams also benefited more broadly from sustainability planning; this included being better able to plan for program spread as well as skill retention and knowledge transfer. This was also seen for quality improvement skills introduced early in the program that were more likely to be maintained and used through other contexts when sustainability planning was present. This study highlights that a QIC can be effective in not only influencing program sustainability but also beyond program implementation through improving knowledge and skill acquisition.

BACKGROUND: Integrated Knowledge Translation (IKT) and other forms of research co-production are increasingly recognized as valuable approaches to knowledge creation as a way to better facilitate the implementation of scientific findings. However, the nature of some scientific work can preclude direct knowledge to action as a likely outcome. Do IKT approaches have value in such cases?
METHODS: This study used a qualitative case study approach to better understand the function of IKT in a non-traditional application: basic and clinical science investigating the causes and consequences of food allergy. Building off previous baseline findings, data were obtained through in-depth interviews with project scientists and steering committee members and complemented by researcher observation. Data were analyzed through an integrated approach to understand how well participants perceived the stipulated project IKT outcomes had been met and to better understand the relationship between different forms of IKT goals, outcomes, and impacts.
RESULTS: We propose a conceptual model which builds temporal continuity into the IKT work and understands success beyond truncated timelines of any one project. The model proposes project IKT goals be conceptualized through three metaphorical tower blocks: foundational (changing the culture for both scientists and knowledge-users), laying the groundwork (building relationships, networks and sparking scientific inquiry), and putting scientific knowledge to action. Based on this model, this case study demonstrated notable success at the foundational and intermediate blocks, though did not turn basic and clinical research knowledge into actionable outcomes within the project timespan.
CONCLUSIONS: We find that current IKT literature which situates success as filling a knowledge to action gap is conceptually inadequate for understanding the full contributions of IKT activities. This work highlights the need for building cultural and scientific familiarity with IKT in order to better enable knowledge to action translation. Improving understanding and communication of science and empowering knowledge-users to engage with the research agenda are long-term strategies to build towards knowledge implementation and lay the ground work for many future research projects.

BACKGROUND: CAPACITI is a virtual education program that teaches primary care teams how to provide an early palliative approach to care. After piloting its implementation, we conducted an in-depth qualitative study with CAPACITI participants to assess the effectiveness of the components and to understand the challenges and enablers to virtual palliative care education.
METHODS: We applied a qualitative case study approach to assess and synthesize three sources of data collected from the teams that participated in CAPACITI: reflection survey data, open text survey data, and focus group transcriptions. We completed a thematic analysis of these responses to gain an understanding of participant experiences with the intervention and its application in practice.
RESULTS: The CAPACITI program was completed by 22 primary care teams consisting of 159 participants across Ontario, Canada. Qualitative data was obtained from all teams, including 15 teams that participated in focus groups and 21 teams that provided reflection survey data on CAPACITI content and how it translated into practice. Three major themes arose from cross-analysis of the data: changes in practice derived from involvement in CAPACITI, utility of specific elements of the program, and barriers and challenges to enacting CAPACITI in practice. Importantly, participants reported that the multifaceted approach of CAPACITI was helpful to them building their confidence and competence in applying a palliative approach to care.
CONCLUSIONS: Primary care teams perceived the CAPACITI facilitated program as effective towards incorporating palliative care into their practices. CAPACITI warrants further study on a national scale using a randomized trial methodology. Future iterations of CAPACITI need to help mitigate barriers identified by respondents, including team fragmentation and system-based challenges to encourage interprofessional collaboration and knowledge translation.

Background Hospitals invest extensive resources in large-scale initiatives to improve patient safety and quality at an organizational level. However, initial success, if any, does not guarantee longer-term improvement. Empirical and theoretical knowledge that informs hospitals on how to attain sustained improvement from large-scale change is lacking. Aim The proposed study aims to examine improvement sustainability of two large-scale initiatives in an Australian tertiary hospital and translate the lessons into strategies for achieving sustained improvement from large-scale change in hospital settings. Design and Methods The study employs a single-site, multiple-case study design to evaluate the initiatives separately and comparatively using mixed methods. Semi-structured staff interviews will be conducted in stratified cohorts across the organizational hierarchy to capture different perspectives from various staff roles involved in the initiatives. The output and impact of the initiatives will be examined through organizational documents and relevant routinely collected organizational indicators. The obtained data will be analyzed thematically and statistically before being integrated for a synergic interpretation. Implications Capturing a comprehensive organizational view of large-scale change, the findings will have the potential to guide the practice and contribute to the theoretical understandings for achieving meaningful and longer-term organizational improvement in patient safety and quality.

UNASSIGNED: Biological sex-related factors influence pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic, and disease processes that may affect the predictability of drug dosing and adverse effects, which may in turn have clinical consequences for patients\' lives. Nonetheless, sex-related factors are not always taken into account in clinical trial design or clinical decision-making, for multiple reasons, including a paucity of studies that clearly and objectively study and measure sex-disaggregated and sex-related outcomes, as well as gaps in regulatory and policy structures for integrating these considerations.
UNASSIGNED: To complete a narrative review and use a case study to understand available evidence, inform future research, and provide policy considerations that incorporate information on sex- and gender-related factors into clinician-facing resources.
UNASSIGNED: A comprehensive review of available literature was conducted using a sex- and gender-based analysis plus (SGBA Plus) approach to identify sex- and/or gender-disaggregated information for gilteritinib, a chemotherapeutic agent. Systematic searches were performed in MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CENTRAL (Wiley), International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (Ovid), Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov, from inception to March 18, 2021. The information was then summarized and compared with the Canadian product monograph for this drug.
UNASSIGNED: Of 311 records screened, 3 provided SGBA Plus information as a component of outcomes, rather than just as categories or demographic characteristics. Of these, 2 were case studies, and 1 was a clinical trial. No studies from the ClinicalTrials.gov database that were in progress at the time of this review provided details about sex-disaggregated outcomes. The Canadian product monograph did not include sex-disaggregated outcome data.
UNASSIGNED: The available evidence from clinical trials, other published literature, and guidance documents does not provide details about sex-disaggregated outcomes for gilteritinib. This paucity of available evidence may create a challenge for clinicians who are making decisions about the efficacy and safety of prescribed therapies in sex-specific populations that have not been well studied.
UNASSIGNED: Les facteurs liés au sexe biologique influencent les processus pharmacocinétiques, pharmacodynamiques et pathologiques, qui peuvent avoir une incidence sur la prévisibilité du dosage des médicaments et des effets indésirables. Ceci peut à son tour avoir des conséquences cliniques sur la vie des patients. Néanmoins, les facteurs liés au sexe ne sont pas toujours pris en compte dans la conception des essais cliniques ou la prise de décision clinique, et cela pour de nombreuses raisons – notamment le manque d’études qui examinent et mesurent clairement et objectivement les résultats ventilés par sexe et liés au sexe ainsi que les lacunes dans les réglementations et structures politiques pour intégrer ces considérations.
UNASSIGNED: Mener un examen narratif et utiliser une étude de cas pour comprendre les preuves disponibles, éclairer les recherches futures et fournir des considérations politiques qui intègrent des informations sur les facteurs liés au sexe et au genre dans les ressources destinées aux cliniciens.
UNASSIGNED: Une revue complète de la littérature disponible a été réalisée à l’aide d’une analyse comparative fondée sur le sexe et le genre Plus (ACSG Plus) pour identifier les informations ventilées par sexe et/ou par genre pour le giltéritinib, un agent chimiothérapeutique. Des recherches systématiques ont été effectuées dans MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CENTRAL (Wiley), International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (Ovid), Scopus et ClinicalTrials.gov, depuis la création de chaque base de données jusqu’au 18 mars 2021. Ces informations ont ensuite été résumées et comparées avec la monographie canadienne de produit pharmaceutique pour ce médicament.
UNASSIGNED: Sur les 311 documents examinés, 3 ont fourni des informations ACSG Plus en tant que composante des résultats, plutôt que simplement en tant que catégories ou caractéristiques démographiques. Parmi ceux-ci, 2 étaient des études de cas et 1 était un essai clinique. Aucune étude de la base de données ClinicalTrials.gov en cours au moment de cette revue n’a fourni de détails sur les résultats ventilés par sexe. La monographie de produit canadienne ne comprenait pas de données sur les résultats ventilées par sexe.
UNASSIGNED: Les preuves disponibles issues d’essais cliniques, d’autres publications et de documents d’orientation ne fournissent pas de détails sur les résultats ventilés par sexe pour le giltéritinib. Ce manque d’éléments probants disponibles peut constituer un défi pour les cliniciens qui prennent des décisions sur l’efficacité et l’innocuité des thérapies prescrites chez des populations sexospécifiques qui n’ont pas été bien étudiées.

UNASSIGNED: Youth and parent engagement is a key component of clinical research. There are many ways to actively and meaningfully engage youth and parents as integral members of research teams, for example, through ad-hoc committees, advisory councils, or as co-leads on projects. When youth and parents are actively and meaningfully engaged in research projects, they share knowledge from their lived experiences to improve the quality and relevance of research.
UNASSIGNED: We describe a case-based example of engaging youth and parent research partners when co-designing a questionnaire to assess preferences for pediatric headache treatments, from both a researcher and youth/parent perspective. We also summarize best practices in patient and family engagement from the literature and pertinent guidelines to assist researchers with integrating patient and family engagement into their studies.
UNASSIGNED: As researchers, we felt that the integration of a youth and parent engagement plan into our study significantly altered and strengthened questionnaire content validity. We encountered challenges throughout the process and detailed these experiences to help educate others about challenge mitigation and best practices in youth and parent engagement. As youth and parent partners, we felt that engaging in the process of questionnaire development was an exciting and empowering opportunity, and that our feedback was valued and integrated.
UNASSIGNED: By sharing our experience, we hope to catalyze thought and discussion around the importance of youth and parent engagement in pediatric research, with the goal of stimulating more appropriate, relevant, and high-quality pediatric research and clinical care in the future.

While there is a well-developed body of literature in the health field that describes processes to implement research, there is a dearth of similar literature in the disability field of research involving complex conditions. Moreover, the development of meaningful and sustainable knowledge translation is now a standard component of the research process. Knowledge users, including community members, service providers, and policy makers now call for evidence-led meaningful activities to occur rapidly. In response, this article presents a case study that explores the needs and priorities of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women in Australia who have experienced a traumatic brain injury due to family violence. Drawing on the work of Indigenous disability scholars such as Gilroy, Avery and others, this article describes the practical and conceptual methods used to transform research to respond to the realities of community concerns and priorities, cultural considerations and complex safety factors. This article offers a unique perspective on how to increase research relevance to knowledge users and enhance the quality of data collection while also overcoming prolonged delays of knowledge translation that can result from the research-production process.

BACKGROUND: Transdisciplinary research and knowledge translation are increasingly regarded as key concepts underpinning applied research across the health and social sciences, due to their presumed potential in addressing complex, \"wicked\" problems and improving the use of research in practice and policy, respectively. Despite sharing an impact mandate, the relationship between transdisciplinary research collaboration and knowledge translation remains unclear. In response, we examined the relationship between transdisciplinary collaboration and knowledge translation to generate these understandings with a view towards maximizing the impact of collaborative efforts.
METHODS: We undertook a realist evaluation and longitudinal case study of a 5-year National Health and Medical Research Council-funded Centre of Research Excellence in Transdisciplinary Frailty Research. Data were collected between February 2017 and March 2020 over three rounds of theory development, refinement and testing using interviews, observation, document review and visual elicitation as data sources. The Human Research Ethics Committee of the University of Adelaide approved this study.
RESULTS: Iterative analysis of narrative interviews and visual data led to the development of three overarching programme theories explicating the reciprocal relationship between KT understandings and transdisciplinary team process. These programme theories revolve around the concept of a network, which we define in alignment with extant theoretical literature on network mechanisms and complex networks as graphically representable networks of agents/people (nodes) joined by social relationships (links). Our findings demonstrate that under the right contextual conditions, transdisciplinary team members respond through an improved ability to (1) navigate the network, (2) negotiate the network and (3) mobilize the network.
CONCLUSIONS: This research demonstrates the reciprocity and mutually supportive relationship between transdisciplinary research and knowledge translation. Our findings suggest that embedding a collaborative knowledge translation framework and providing resources such as facilitation and distributed leadership within a transdisciplinary team can improve collaboration and support transdisciplinary research objectives.