Knowledge translation

知识翻译
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:尽管在实施方面存在不确定性,人工智能驱动的生成语言模型(GLM)在医学领域具有巨大的潜力。GLM的部署可以提高患者对临床文本的理解,并改善低健康素养。
    目的:本研究的目的是评估ChatGPT-3.5和GPT-4的潜力,以适应患者特定输入教育水平的医疗信息的复杂性,这是至关重要的,如果它是作为解决低健康素养的工具。
    方法:设计了与2种常见慢性疾病-II型糖尿病和高血压-相关的输入模板。针对假设的患者教育水平调整每个临床小插图,以评估输出个性化。要评估GLM(GPT-3.5和GPT-4)在定制输出编写方面的成功,使用Flesch阅读缓解评分(FKRE)和Flesch-Kincaid等级(FKGL)对转换前后输出的可读性进行量化.
    结果:使用GPT-3.5和GPT-4在2个临床小插曲中产生反应(n=80)。对于GPT-3.5,FKRE平均值为57.75(SD4.75),51.28(标准差5.14),32.28(标准差4.52),六年级为28.31(SD5.22),8年级,高中,和单身汉,分别;FKGL平均得分为9.08(SD0.90),10.27(标准差1.06),13.4(标准差0.80),和13.74(标准差1.18)。GPT-3.5仅与学士学位的预设教育水平保持一致。相反,GPT-4的FKRE平均得分为74.54(SD2.6),71.25(标准差4.96),47.61(标准差6.13),和13.71(标准差5.77),FKGL平均得分为6.3(SD0.73),6.7(标准差1.11),11.09(标准差1.26),和17.03(标准差1.11),分别为相同的教育水平。GPT-4符合除6级FKRE平均值外的所有组的目标可读性。两种GLM的产出均具有统计学上的显着差异(P<.001;8年级P<.001;高中P<.001;学士P=.003;FKGL:6年级P=.001;8年级P<.001;高中P<.001;学士P<.001)。
    结论:GLM可以根据输入指定的教育来改变医学文本输出的结构和可读性。然而,GLM将输入教育指定分类为3个广泛的输出可读性等级:容易(6年级和8年级),中等(高中),和困难(学士学位)。这是第一个结果表明GLM在输出文本简化方面的成功存在更广泛的界限。未来的研究必须确定GLM如何可靠地将医学文本个性化到预定的教育水平,以便对医疗保健素养产生更广泛的影响。
    BACKGROUND: Although uncertainties exist regarding implementation, artificial intelligence-driven generative language models (GLMs) have enormous potential in medicine. Deployment of GLMs could improve patient comprehension of clinical texts and improve low health literacy.
    OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study is to evaluate the potential of ChatGPT-3.5 and GPT-4 to tailor the complexity of medical information to patient-specific input education level, which is crucial if it is to serve as a tool in addressing low health literacy.
    METHODS: Input templates related to 2 prevalent chronic diseases-type II diabetes and hypertension-were designed. Each clinical vignette was adjusted for hypothetical patient education levels to evaluate output personalization. To assess the success of a GLM (GPT-3.5 and GPT-4) in tailoring output writing, the readability of pre- and posttransformation outputs were quantified using the Flesch reading ease score (FKRE) and the Flesch-Kincaid grade level (FKGL).
    RESULTS: Responses (n=80) were generated using GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 across 2 clinical vignettes. For GPT-3.5, FKRE means were 57.75 (SD 4.75), 51.28 (SD 5.14), 32.28 (SD 4.52), and 28.31 (SD 5.22) for 6th grade, 8th grade, high school, and bachelor\'s, respectively; FKGL mean scores were 9.08 (SD 0.90), 10.27 (SD 1.06), 13.4 (SD 0.80), and 13.74 (SD 1.18). GPT-3.5 only aligned with the prespecified education levels at the bachelor\'s degree. Conversely, GPT-4\'s FKRE mean scores were 74.54 (SD 2.6), 71.25 (SD 4.96), 47.61 (SD 6.13), and 13.71 (SD 5.77), with FKGL mean scores of 6.3 (SD 0.73), 6.7 (SD 1.11), 11.09 (SD 1.26), and 17.03 (SD 1.11) for the same respective education levels. GPT-4 met the target readability for all groups except the 6th-grade FKRE average. Both GLMs produced outputs with statistically significant differences (P<.001; 8th grade P<.001; high school P<.001; bachelors P=.003; FKGL: 6th grade P=.001; 8th grade P<.001; high school P<.001; bachelors P<.001) between mean FKRE and FKGL across input education levels.
    CONCLUSIONS: GLMs can change the structure and readability of medical text outputs according to input-specified education. However, GLMs categorize input education designation into 3 broad tiers of output readability: easy (6th and 8th grade), medium (high school), and difficult (bachelor\'s degree). This is the first result to suggest that there are broader boundaries in the success of GLMs in output text simplification. Future research must establish how GLMs can reliably personalize medical texts to prespecified education levels to enable a broader impact on health care literacy.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:近年来,学者们越来越认识到让卫生服务用户和社区利益相关者作为卫生研究的积极伙伴的重要性。然而,老年人的参与,最大的卫生服务用户群体,由于研究伙伴仍然有限,可能是由于年龄歧视的态度贬低了老年人的贡献。在我们觉醒加拿大人对老龄问题研究的三年中,我们召集了一个由老年人和老年学专家组成的咨询小组,讨论与年龄歧视有关的问题,帮助解释研究结果,并制定一系列知识动员策略来消除年龄歧视。
    方法:为了了解咨询小组成员的经验,并征求改进未来小组的建议,我们进行了一项定性描述性研究,并采访了8名老年人和6名老年学专家.对数据进行了内容分析。
    结果:为解释参与者的经验和对未来咨询小组的建议而开发的四个类别包括:组织和管理,团体经验,为未来的咨询小组和前进提出建议。一个关键的发现是,老年人和老年学专家将有关年龄歧视的普遍性以及他们希望在其个人团体和专业网络中继续进行这些类型的对话的对话归因于价值。为未来的咨询小组确定了许多有用的战略,例如加强社会多样性,在种族/族裔/文化代表性和性别方面。老年人希望在会议中更多地“了解你的时间”,老年学专家希望了解更多关于研究过程及其作用的细节。
    结论:这项研究的伙伴关系方法可以指导研究人员寻求让主要的卫生服务使用者和社区利益相关者参与卫生研究,并帮助制定积极的社会变革。
    在2022年,我们成立了一个由老年人和老年学专家组成的咨询小组,以审查我们研究的第一阶段的发现,《觉醒加拿大人向老龄问题》,并就知识动员和下一步行动提供指导。我们采访了我们咨询小组的12名老年人和6名老年学专家,以了解他们在该小组的经验,并为未来的小组提供建议。参与者提供了关于团体组织的反馈,管理和流程,除了他们的经验和未来咨询小组的战略。两个团体都建议加强团体的社会多样性,在种族/族裔/文化代表性和性别方面。老年人希望有更多的会议时间来了解其他小组成员,老年学专家希望了解有关研究过程及其作用的更多详细信息。
    BACKGROUND: In recent years, academics have increasingly acknowledged the importance of involving health service users and community stakeholders as active partners in health research. Yet, the involvement of older adults, the largest group of health service users, as research partners remains limited, possibly due to ageist attitudes that devalue older adults\' contributions. During the three years of our Awakening Canadians to Ageism study, we convened an advisory group consisting of older adults and gerontological experts to discuss issues related to ageism, help interpret the study findings, and develop a range of knowledge mobilization strategies to dispel ageism.
    METHODS: To understand the experiences of members of the advisory group and solicit recommendations for improving future groups, we conducted a qualitative descriptive study and interviewed 8 older adults and 6 gerontological experts. Data were content analyzed.
    RESULTS: Four categories that were developed to explain participants\' experiences and suggestions for future advisory groups included: organization and management, group experience, suggestions for future advisory groups and moving forward. A key finding was the value that the older adults and gerontological experts ascribed to conversations about the prevalence of ageism and their desire to continue these types of conversations in their personal groups and professional networks. Numerous helpful strategies for future advisory groups were identified, such as enhancing social diversity, both in terms of racial/ethnic/cultural representation and gender. Older adults wanted more \"getting to know you time\" in meetings and gerontological experts wanted more details about the research process and their role.
    CONCLUSIONS: This study\'s partnership approach can guide researchers seeking to involve key health service users and community stakeholders in health research and help enact positive social change.
    In 2022 we developed an advisory group consisting of older adults and gerontological experts to review the findings of the first stage of our study Awakening Canadians to Ageism and provide guidance on knowledge mobilization and next steps. We interviewed 12 older adults and 6 gerontological experts from our advisory group to learn about their experiences with the group and provide suggestions for future groups. Participants provided feedback on group organization, management and processes, in addition to their experiences and strategies for future advisory groups. Both groups suggested enhancing the social diversity of the group, both in terms of racial/ethnic/cultural representation and gender. Older adults wanted more meeting time dedicated to getting to know the other groups members and gerontological experts wanted more details about the research process and their role.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    姑息治疗中的跨专业合作对于确保为重病患者提供高质量的护理至关重要。提高姑息治疗能力的教育干预措施应纳入团队建设技能,以鼓励跨专业方法。我们为跨专业团队开发并试行了名为CAPACITI的虚拟教育计划,以促进社区姑息治疗方法。来自安大略省各地的初级保健团队,加拿大,参加了CAPACITI,该会议包括10次会议,强调如何作为一个团队实施姑息治疗方法。研究前和研究后的问卷由每个团队完成,包括AITCS-II,一种经过验证的衡量跨专业合作的工具。我们分析了汇总分数和AITCS-II问卷三个子领域中每个子领域的个体配对差异:伙伴关系,合作,和协调。17个小组完成了AITCS-II后调查,代表133名参与者。团队在人口统计学上有所不同,成员从5到16人不等。在CAPACITI之后,团队之间的AITCS-II总平均得分增加至96.0(SD=10.0),配对平均差显著增加9.4(p=.03).伙伴关系(p=.01)和合作子领域(p=.04)也有显著增加。CAPACITI展示了改善初级保健团队之间合作的潜力,这可以改善姑息治疗的提供者和患者结果。
    Interprofessional collaboration in palliative care is essential to ensuring high-quality care for seriously ill patients. Education interventions to increase competency in palliative care should incorporate team-building skills to encourage an interprofessional approach. We developed and piloted a virtual educational program named CAPACITI for interprofessional teams to promote a community palliative approach to care. Primary care teams from across Ontario, Canada, participated in CAPACITI which consisted of 10 facilitated sessions that emphasized how to operationalize a palliative care approach as a team. Pre- and post-study questionnaires were completed by each team, including the AITCS-II, a validated instrument that measures interprofessional collaboration. We analyzed individual paired differences in summary scores and in each of three subdomains of the AITCS-II questionnaire: partnership, cooperation, and coordination. Seventeen teams completed the AITCS-II post survey, representing 133 participants. Teams varied demographically and ranged from 5 to 16 members. After CAPACITI, the overall mean AITCS-II summary score among teams increased to 96.0 (SD = 10.0) for a significant paired mean difference increase of 9.4 (p = .03). There were also significant increases in the partnership (p = .01) and in the cooperation subdomains (p = .04). CAPACITI demonstrated the potential for improving collaboration among primary care teams, which can lead to improved provider and patient outcomes in palliative care.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    (1)背景:高强度步态训练(HIT)是一种推荐的干预措施,可改善步行功能(例如,速度和距离)在接受中风康复的个体中。这项研究探索了临床医生的感知障碍和促进者,以利用包括调查和探索性定性研究在内的混合方法实施HIT。(2)方法:在三个设施中实施HIT的临床医生(n=13)参加。我们使用合并的实施研究框架收集和分析数据。三个焦点组被记录和转录,和数据被编码和主题分类。(3)结果:调查结果确定,对实施产生重大影响的促进者是获得知识/资源和干预知识/信念。唯一具有强大影响的商定障碍是缺乏变革的张力。焦点小组产生了87个报价,这些报价被编码为27个构造。经常被引用的外部环境促进者是世界主义和同伴压力,唯一的障碍与患者的需求有关。推动者的创新特征包括相对优势、设计质量和包装,复杂性是一个障碍。内部设置促进者包括网络和通信,学习氛围,领导参与,并做好实施准备。然而,通信,领导参与,可用资源也是障碍。关于个人的特征,知识和信念既是障碍又是促进者。在实现过程域中,共同促进者被正式任命为实施领导者和创新参与者。该领域的障碍与患者有关。(4)结论:临床医生确定了实施HIT的许多障碍和促进者,这些障碍和促进者通常在设施之间有所不同。有必要进行进一步的研究,以加深我们对临床医生HIT实施经验的理解。
    (1) Background: High-intensity gait training (HIT) is a recommended intervention that improves walking function (e.g., speed and distance) in individuals who are undergoing stroke rehabilitation. This study explored clinicians\' perceived barriers and facilitators to implementing HIT utilizing a mixed-methods approach comprising a survey and exploratory qualitative research. (2) Methods: Clinicians (n = 13) who were implementing HIT at three facilities participated. We collected and analyzed data using the consolidated framework for implementation research. Three focus groups were recorded and transcribed, and data were coded and thematically categorized. (3) Results: Survey results identified that the facilitators with a strong impact on implementation were access to knowledge/resources and intervention knowledge/beliefs. The only agreed-upon barrier with a strong impact was lack of tension for change. The focus groups resulted in 87 quotes that were coded into 27 constructs. Frequently cited outer setting facilitators were cosmopolitanism and peer pressure, and the only barrier was related to the patient needs. Innovation characteristics that were facilitators included relative advantage and design quality and packaging, and complexity was a barrier. Inner setting facilitators included networks and communication, learning climate, leadership engagement, and readiness for implementation. However, communication, leadership engagement, and available resources were also barriers. Regarding characteristics of individuals, knowledge and beliefs were both barriers and facilitators. In the implementation process domain, common facilitators were formally appointed implementation leaders and innovation participants. Barriers in this domain were related to the patients. (4) Conclusions: Clinicians identified many barriers and facilitators to implementing HIT that often varied between facilities. Further research is warranted to deepen our understanding of clinicians\' experiences with HIT implementation.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:循证实践,结合最佳护理质量,改善患者的临床预后。然而,其在日常临床实践中的实施仍然存在困难。这项研究的目的是确定高级实践护士(APN)应用于促进遵守临床实践指南建议的策略。
    方法:对属于巴利阿里群岛卫生保健服务(西班牙)的三家公立医院的六个焦点小组进行了一项探索性定性研究。研究参与者是32名病房护士和5名高级执业护士,他们在这些医院常规与住院病人一起工作。这项研究于2020年11月至2021年1月进行,采用专题分析,根据COREQ清单。
    结果:RNs和APNs确定了与促进过程相关的四个主要主题:项目背景,APN对护理团队管理的贡献,病房里的医疗保健,以及知识的获取和应用。
    结论:APN根据当地情况的特点和需要调整其行动,采用旨在改善团队合作的策略,healthcare,和知识管理。这些贡献中的每一个都增强了所做变革的可持续性。
    BACKGROUND: Evidence-based practice, in conjunction with optimum care quality, improves patients\' clinical outcomes. However, its implementation in daily clinical practice continues to present difficulties. The aim of this study was to identify the strategies applied by Advanced Practice Nurses (APNs) to foster adherence to clinical practice guideline recommendations.
    METHODS: An exploratory qualitative study was conducted with six focus groups at three public hospitals belonging to the Balearic Islands Health Care Service (Spain). The study participants were 32 ward nurses and 5 advanced practice nurses working routinely with inpatients at these hospitals. The study was conducted from November 2020 to January 2021, using thematic analysis, based on the COREQ checklist.
    RESULTS: Four major themes related to the facilitation process were identified either by RNs and APNs: the context of the project, APN contribution to nursing team management, healthcare provision on the ward, and the acquisition and application of knowledge.
    CONCLUSIONS: The APNs adapted their actions to the characteristics and needs of the local context, employing strategies aimed at improving teamwork, healthcare, and knowledge management. Each of these contributions enhanced the sustainability of the changes made.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Editorial
    暂无摘要。
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    社交媒体可能会促进知识共享,但用户如何使用新知识以及它如何影响实践仍有待了解。这项探索性研究使用社会建构主义的视角来了解健康专业教育者和研究人员如何将社交媒体的知识整合到各自的实践中。我们使用#MedEd标签对健康专业教育者和研究人员进行了有目的地抽样,#HPE,和#HealthProfessionsEducation在Twitter/X.我们获得了知情同意书,通过视频会议进行采访,并从事多个周期的演绎和归纳编码和分析。参与者被确定为教育工作者和研究人员(n=12),作为研究人员(n=1),或作为加拿大的教育工作者(n=1)(n=8),美国(n=3)瑞士,爱尔兰,和中国(分别为n=1)。八名参与者积极使用社交媒体(即,创建/发布原创内容);六名参与者表示被动使用(即阅读/转发内容)。他们讨论了制作可消费消息和社交媒体身份以简化共享内容的重要性。社交媒体可访问,非等级性质可以促进知识共享,而错误信息和技术要求的潜在传播(例如,互联网接入,特定国家对平台的限制)构成了吸收的障碍。参与者描述了使用从社交媒体获得的知识作为教学工具,新的研究方法,新的理论框架,和低风险的临床干预措施。以前的研究已经证明了社交媒体是如何在经验上被用于传播或传播的,而不是作为一个积极的证据吸收过程。使用知识翻译框架,像知识到行动或理论领域框架,建议在卫生专业教育中进行基于社交媒体的知识共享活动。
    Social media may promote knowledge sharing but what users do with the new knowledge and how it may influence practice remains to be known. This exploratory study used a social constructivist lens to understand how health professions educators and researchers integrate knowledge from social media into their respective practices. We purposively sampled health professions educators and researchers using the hashtags #MedEd, #HPE, and #HealthProfessionsEducation on Twitter/X. We obtained informed consent, conducted interviews via videoconference, and engaged in multiple cycles of deductive and inductive coding and analysis. Participants identified as educators and researchers (n = 12), as researchers (n = 1), or as educators (n = 1) from Canada (n = 8), the United States (n = 3), and Switzerland, Ireland, and China (n = 1, respectively). Eight participants actively used social media (i.e., creating/posting original content); six participants indicated passive use (i.e., reading/retweeting content). They discussed the importance of crafting a consumable message and social media identity to streamline the content shared. Social media\'s accessible, non-hierarchical nature may facilitate knowledge-sharing, whereas the potential spread of misinformation and technological requirements (e.g., internet access, country-specific restrictions on platforms) present barriers to uptake. Participants described using knowledge gained from social media as teaching tools, new research methodologies, new theoretical frameworks, and low-risk clinical interventions. Previous research has demonstrated how social media has empirically been used for diffusion or dissemination rather than as an active process of evidence uptake. Using knowledge translation frameworks, like the Knowledge to Action or Theoretical Domains frameworks, to inform social media-based knowledge sharing activities in health professions education is recommended.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:这项横断面研究调查了Cochrane关于数字健康技术的评论的在线传播。
    方法:我们搜索了Cochrane系统评论数据库,该数据库从开始到2023年5月。Cochrane对任何人群的评论(P),任何数字技术支持的干预或概念(I),任何或没有比较(C),并包括任何健康结果(O)。关于评论特征的数据(书目信息,PICO,和证据质量)和传播策略被提取和处理。传播是使用Cochrane网站上的评论信息和Altmetric数据进行评估的,这些数据追踪了非学术在线渠道中学术出版物的提及。数据采用描述性统计和二元逻辑回归分析。
    结果:在搜索中确定的170条记录中,100条Cochrane评论,2005年至2023年出版的,包括在内。评论侧重于消费者(如患者、n=86),任何年龄的人(n=44),和临床人群(n=68)。所有评论都涉及数字技术支持的任何设备的干预措施或概念(n=73),移动设备(n=17),或计算机(n=10)。结果集中在疾病治疗上(n=56),健康促进和疾病预防(n=27),或护理交付管理(n=17)。所有评论包括1-132项研究,一半包括1-10项研究。在69篇综述中进行了荟萃分析,在46篇综述中,至少一项结局的证据确定性被评为高或中.根据Cochrane指南,所有评论都有简单的语言摘要(PLS),有3-14种语言版本.评论主要通过X/Twitter(n=99)和Facebook(n=69)传播(即在线提及)。总的来说,在Altmetric数据追踪的所有研究产出中,多达25%的研究中提到了51条评论,5%的研究中提到了49条评论。传播(即更高的Altmetric分数)与书目审查特征(即较早的出版年份和PLS以更多语言提供)相关,但不具有证据质量(即证据评级的确定性,研究的数量,或综述中进行的荟萃分析)。
    结论:在线关注Cochrane关于数字健康技术的评论。对于较旧的评论和具有更多PLS翻译的评论,传播率更高。需要采取措施改善基于证据质量的Cochrane评论的传播。
    背景:该研究在开放科学框架(https://osf.io/mpw8u/)上进行了前瞻性注册。
    BACKGROUND: This cross-sectional study investigated the online dissemination of Cochrane reviews on digital health technologies.
    METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from inception up to May 2023. Cochrane reviews with any population (P), intervention or concept supported by any digital technology (I), any or no comparison (C), and any health outcome (O) were included. Data on review characteristics (bibliographic information, PICO, and evidence quality) and dissemination strategies were extracted and processed. Dissemination was assessed using review information on the Cochrane website and Altmetric data that trace the mentions of academic publications in nonacademic online channels. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and binary logistic regression analysis.
    RESULTS: Out of 170 records identified in the search, 100 Cochrane reviews, published between 2005 and 2023, were included. The reviews focused on consumers (e.g. patients, n = 86), people of any age (n = 44), and clinical populations (n = 68). All reviews addressed interventions or concepts supported by digital technologies with any devices (n = 73), mobile devices (n = 17), or computers (n = 10). The outcomes focused on disease treatment (n = 56), health promotion and disease prevention (n = 27), or management of care delivery (n = 17). All reviews included 1-132 studies, and half included 1-10 studies. Meta-analysis was performed in 69 reviews, and certainty of evidence was rated as high or moderate for at least one outcome in 46 reviews. In agreement with the Cochrane guidelines, all reviews had a plain language summary (PLS) that was available in 3-14 languages. The reviews were disseminated (i.e. mentioned online) predominantly via X/Twitter (n = 99) and Facebook (n = 69). Overall, 51 reviews were mentioned in up to 25% and 49 reviews in 5% of all research outputs traced by Altmetric data. Dissemination (i.e. higher Altmetric scores) was associated with bibliographic review characteristics (i.e. earlier publication year and PLS available in more languages), but not with evidence quality (i.e. certainty of evidence rating, number of studies, or meta-analysis performed in review).
    CONCLUSIONS: Online attention towards Cochrane reviews on digital health technologies is high. Dissemination is higher for older reviews and reviews with more PLS translations. Measures are required to improve dissemination of Cochrane reviews based on evidence quality.
    BACKGROUND: The study was prospectively registered at the Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/mpw8u/ ).
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    同时患有精神健康和物质使用障碍的人有复杂的生物心理社会问题,但有可能无法满足他们的医疗保健需求。护士可以满足这些需求,但通常缺乏并发疾病管理方面的培训。社区医疗保健成果的扩展(ECHO®,新墨西哥大学健康科学中心,2003)是一种有前途的技术支持的协作学习模式,用于实施基于证据的实践,并在医疗保健专业人员中建立管理复杂的能力,慢性,健康状况。
    了解ECHO并发障碍管理计划如何影响护士的能力发展和临床实践,并揭示成功吸收和实施的关键条件。
    收敛混合方法设计,包括定量,不受控制的前后研究和使用解释性描述方法的定性研究。
    2018年在加拿大西部大都市的四级学术医院中心实施了ECHO并发疾病管理计划。在2018年至2020年期间在该计划中注册的所有65名护士都被邀请参加该研究。
    由参与护士(N=28)完成的在线调查在基线和进入计划后的6个月和12个月进行,以测量护士相关结果的变化。采用描述性统计和重复测量分析对调查数据进行分析。对护士亚组(n=10)进行了半结构化访谈,以探讨他们如何发展和实施能力以及影响此过程的因素。采用归纳主题分析法对访谈笔录进行分析。使用支柱集成流程,我们分析了两种方法的结果,以提供对现象的更丰富的理解。
    我们确定了六个相互关联的关键条件,可以成功地采用和实施ECHO并发疾病护理中的循证实践:(1)实践和验证机会;(2)在跨专业教育背景下的互惠和信任关系;(3)对等经验共享;(4)与专家的合作;(5)加强对个人的专业支持的积极态度。(6)
    结果指标,观点,在12个月内收集的经验表明,ECHO为护士的能力发展做出了贡献,在某些条件下,有效的护理实践变革。鉴于在并发疾病护理中实施临床指南的挑战,我们的结果强调了理解成功吸收和实施的关键条件的重要性。这为最佳调整实施策略以适应护士的需求和具体情况的方法提供了信息,以获得有影响力和可持续的结果。
    UNASSIGNED: People with concurrent mental health and substance use disorders have complex biopsychosocial problems but risk not having their healthcare needs met. Nurses are positioned to meet these needs but often lack training in concurrent disorder management. Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO®, University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, 2003) is a promising technology-enabled collaborative learning model used to implement evidence-based practice and build capacity among healthcare professionals in managing complex, chronic, health conditions.
    UNASSIGNED: To understand how an ECHO program for concurrent disorder management impacts nurses\' competency development and clinical practice and uncover key conditions for successful uptake and implementation.
    UNASSIGNED: A convergent mixed-methods design comprising a quantitative, uncontrolled before-and-after study and a qualitative study using interpretive description methodology.
    UNASSIGNED: An ECHO program for concurrent disorder management was implemented in 2018 at a quaternary academic hospital centre in metropolitan Western Canada. All 65 nurses who registered in the program between 2018 and 2020 were invited to participate in the study.
    UNASSIGNED: Online surveys completed by the participating nurses (N = 28) were administered at baseline and six and 12 months following entry-to-program to measure changes in nurse-related outcomes. The survey data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and repeated measures analysis. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a nurse subgroup (n = 10) to explore how they developed and implemented competencies and what factors influenced this process. Interview transcripts were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis. Using the Pillar Integration Process, we analyzed results from both methods to provide a richer understanding of the phenomena.
    UNASSIGNED: We identified six interrelated key conditions for successful uptake and implementation of evidence-based practice in concurrent disorder nursing care with ECHO: (1) Practice and validation opportunities; (2) Reciprocal and trusting relationships in an interprofessional education context; (3) Peer-to-peer experience sharing; (4) Collaboration with experts; (5) Reinforcement of positive attitudes towards one\'s professional role; and (6) Organizational support.
    UNASSIGNED: Outcome measures, perspectives, and experiences collected over 12 months indicated that ECHO contributed to nurses\' competency development and, under some conditions, to effective nursing practice changes. Given the challenges in implementing clinical guidelines in concurrent disorder nursing care, our results highlight the importance of understanding the key conditions for successful uptake and implementation. This informs approaches to optimally adapt implementation strategies to the needs and specificities of nurses to obtain impactful and sustainable results.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:研究人员与政策制定者之间的互动是促进循证决策的重要因素。建立这种关系并促进循证决策的有效途径之一是雇用能够发挥知识经纪人作用的人员或组织。本研究旨在分析伊朗卫生部门的研究人员和政策制定者之间的交流网络和互动,并确定作为学术知识经纪人的关键人物。
    方法:本研究为调查研究。使用人口普查方法,我们对伊朗十大医学大学的卫生领域教职员工进行了社会计量调查,以使用社会网络分析方法构建学术-决策者网络。使用UCINET和NetDraw软件生成网络图。我们使用了学位中心,学位外中心,和中间性中心性指标来确定网络中的知识经纪人。
    结果:绘制的网络共有188个节点,由94名大学教职员工和94名决策者组成,分别来自三个国家,省,和大学水平。该网络总共包括177个链接,125人与政策制定者联系,52人与同行联系。在56名教职员工中,我们确定了四个知识经纪人。六名决策者被确定为网络中的关键决策者,也是。
    结论:从研究证据的生产者到知识的使用者,伊朗卫生领域研究产生的知识流动似乎没有很好地完成。因此,似乎有必要考虑激励和支持机制,以加强伊朗卫生部门研究人员和政策制定者之间的互动。
    BACKGROUND: Interaction between researchers and policymakers is an essential factor to facilitate the evidence-informed policymaking. One of the effective ways to establish this relationship and promote evidence-informed policymaking is to employ people or organizations that can play the role of knowledge brokers. This study aims to analyze the communication network and interactions between researchers and policymakers in Iran\'s health sector and identify key people serving as academic knowledge brokers.
    METHODS: This study was a survey research. Using a census approach, we administered a sociometric survey to faculty members in the health field in top ten Iranian medical universities to construct academic-policymaker network using social network analysis method. Network maps were generated using UCINET and NetDraw software. We used Indegree Centrality, Outdegree Centrality, and Betweenness Centrality indicators to determine knowledge brokers in the network.
    RESULTS: The drawn network had a total of 188 nodes consisting of 94 university faculty members and 94 policymakers at three national, provincial, and university levels. The network comprised a total of 177 links, with 125 connecting to policymakers and 52 to peers. Of 56 faculty members, we identified four knowledge brokers. Six policymakers were identified as key policymakers in the network, too.
    CONCLUSIONS: It seems that the flow of knowledge produced by research in the health field in Iran is not accomplished well from the producers of research evidence to the users of knowledge. Therefore, it seems necessary to consider incentive and support mechanisms to strengthen the interaction between researchers and policymakers in Iran\'s health sector.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号