Search

Background and ObjectivesThere is significant heterogeneity in the reporting of outcome measures in aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) research. The modified Rankin scale (mRS) is the most commonly reported functional outcome measure. The mRS focuses on physical disability; however, many aSAH survivors experience sequalae in other domains, and the mRS may therefore not capture outcomes important to aSAH survivors. The objective of this study was to assess the clinical relevance of the mRS as a research outcome measure to people with lived aSAH experience.MethodsWe conducted an international cross-sectional survey of 355 aSAH survivors, family members, and caregivers to evaluate patient-perceived outcomes in relation to the mRS. The mRS was assessed using a previously validated web-based tool.ResultsResponse rate was 60%; respondents from 7 continents were composed of 86% aSAH survivors and 14% family members/caregivers. Agreement between self-assessed outcome and the mRS was poor (Kappa 0.26 [CI 0.14–0.39]). Of the 172 respondents who self-assessed as having had a good aSAH outcome, 122 (71%) had a score of 0–2 on the mRS. Approximately 19% of respondents with a good outcome, based on a measured mRS score of 0–2, self-assessed as having had a poor aSAH outcome. When the mRS score was dichotomized as 0–3 corresponding to a good outcome, agreement between the score and self-assessed outcome remained poor with a Kappa score of 0.40 (CI 0.20–0.60). Approximately 30% of respondents believed that the mRS should not be used as an outcome measure in future aSAH trials.DiscussionThe findings suggest that there is poor agreement between aSAH survivors' self-assessed outcome, their actual mRS score, and the dichotomization of the mRS score into good/poor outcomes. Patient-centered and patient-informed outcome measurement tools are needed to guide the aSAH research agenda.

Additional file 3.

Additional file 1. Study Checklist.

Additional file 1.

Supplementary Material 1

Additional file 3. CONSORT flow diagram.

Additional file 4. Results of factorial analyses.

Additional file 2.

Additional file 2. Excerpts from the A&F reports.

Additional file 5.

Introduction: We established a patient centric navigation model embedded in primary care (PC) to support access to the broad range of health and social resources; the Access to Resources in the Community (ARC) model.Methods: We evaluated the feasibility of ARC using the rapid cycle evaluations of the intervention processes, patient and PC provider surveys, and navigator log data. PC providers enrolled were asked to refer patients in whom they identified a health and/or social need to the ARC navigator.Results: Participants: 26 family physicians in four practices, and 82 of the 131 patients they referred. ARC was easily integrated in PC practices and was especially valued in the non-interprofessional practices. Patient overall satisfaction was very high (89%). Sixty patients completed the post-intervention surveys, and 33 reported accessing one or more service(s).Conclusion: The ARC Model is an innovative approach to reach and support a broad range of patients access needed resources. The Model is feasible and acceptable to PC providers and patients, and has demonstrated potential for improving patients’ access to health and social resources. This study has informed a pragmatic randomized controlled trial to evaluate the ARC navigation to an existing web and telephone navigation service (Ontario 211).

The aim of this overview of reviews and systematic review update is to identify evidence on the effectiveness of stop smoking interventions for adults for the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (CTFPHC) and their stop smoking guideline for primary care providers.

Background: Tailoring strategies to target the salient barriers to and enablers of implementation is considered a critical step in supporting successful delivery of evidence based interventions in healthcare. Theory, evidence, and stakeholder engagement are considered key ingredients in the process however, these ingredients can be combined in different ways. There is no consensus on the definition of tailoring or single method for tailoring strategies to optimize impact, ensure transparency, and facilitate replication. Aim: The purpose of this scoping review is to describe how tailoring has been undertaken within healthcare to, answer questions about how it has been conceptualised, described, and conducted in practice, and to identify research gaps. Methods: The review will be conducted in accordance with best practice guidelines and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) will be used to guide the reporting. Searches will be conducted of Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, from 2005 to present. Reference lists of included articles will be searched. Grey literature will be searched on Google Scholar. Screening and data extraction will be conducted by two members of the research team, with any discrepancies resolved by consensus discussion with a third reviewer. Initial analysis will be quantitative involving a descriptive numerical summary of the characteristics of the studies and the tailoring process. Qualitative content analysis aligned to the research questions will also be conducted, and data managed using NVivo where applicable. Conclusions: The findings will serve a resource for implementation researchers and practitioners to guide future research in this field and facilitate systematic, transparent, and replicable development of tailored implementation strategies.

Background: Tailoring strategies to target the salient barriers to and enablers of implementation is considered a critical step in supporting successful delivery of evidence based interventions in healthcare. Theory, evidence, and stakeholder engagement are considered key ingredients in the process however, these ingredients can be combined in different ways. There is no consensus on the definition of tailoring or single method for tailoring strategies to optimize impact, ensure transparency, and facilitate replication. Aim: The purpose of this scoping review is to describe how tailoring has been undertaken within healthcare to, answer questions about how it has been conceptualised, described, and conducted in practice, and to identify research gaps. Methods: The review will be conducted in accordance with best practice guidelines and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) will be used to guide the reporting. Searches will be conducted of Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, from 2005 to present. Reference lists of included articles will be searched. Grey literature will be searched on Google Scholar. Screening and data extraction will be conducted by two members of the research team, with any discrepancies resolved by consensus discussion with a third reviewer. Initial analysis will be quantitative involving a descriptive numerical summary of the characteristics of the studies and the tailoring process. Qualitative content analysis aligned to the research questions will also be conducted, and data managed using NVivo where applicable. Conclusions: The findings will serve a resource for implementation researchers and practitioners to guide future research in this field and facilitate systematic, transparent, and replicable development of tailored implementation strategies.

Implementation interventions often focus on healthcare professionals’ deliberative, analytical thinking as a route to achieving practice change, e.g. educational meetings that provide instruction but leave attendees to integrate the lessons into practice. Such deliberative mechanisms are clearly an important element of practice change. However, human behaviour is guided by two cognitive systems: one involving deliberative processes, the other involving automatic processes (e.g. habits, cognitive heuristics). Automatic processes are under-considered in theoretical frameworks commonly used to explore barriers to change. These processes can be difficult to study, since they are not easily observed or self-reported on. Routinely-collected health data can provide a new window into these processes. Such data provide a means to explore processes that are common across all human decision makers and may have substantial impact on real-world clinical behaviour, through investigation across large samples. For example, one study used billing claims data to demonstrate the impact of the availability heuristic (the tendency to assess the likelihood or frequency of an event based on the ease with which occurrences of the event come to mind, rather than on established probabilities). The study found that physicians were less likely to prescribe warfarin to patients with atrial fibrillation to reduce their stroke risk (an evidence-based practice) after one of their patients had a major adverse bleeding event associated with warfarin (a rare but likely salient and easily remembered event) (Choudhry et al., 2006). We are conducting a scoping review to map the ways in which routine data has been used to investigate the impact of automatic processes on clinical practice. Our results will highlight the extent to which different types of automatic processes have been explored using routine data, and will provide insights into how routine data can be used to increase our understanding of factors driving automatic processes and their impact on clinical practice in real-world contexts. Such understanding may ultimately support the development of novel or adapted implementation interventions to target these processes as routes to improving quality of care.

This scoping review aims to identify and summarize patient engagement initiatives in preclinical laboratory science. In addition to summarizing current trends, this review will help to collate existing frameworks and guidance.

systematic review protocol

Brief protocol document outlining the methods used to update the following Cochrane systematic review publication: Ivers N, Jamtvedt G, Flottorp S, Young JM, Odgaard-Jensen J, French SD, O'Brien MA, Johansen M, Grimshaw J, Oxman AD. Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Jun 13;(6):CD000259. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000259.pub3. PMID: 22696318.

Health psychology is at the forefront of developing and disseminating evidence, theories, and methods that have improved the understanding of health behaviour change. However, current dissemination approaches may be insufficient for promoting broader application and impact of this evidence to benefit the health of patients and the public. Nevertheless, behaviour change theory/methods typically directed towards health behaviours are now used in implementation science to understand and support behaviour change in individuals at different health system levels whose own behaviour impacts delivering evidence-based health behaviour change interventions. Despite contributing to implementation science, health psychology is perhaps doing less to draw from it. A redoubled focus on implementation science in health psychology could provide novel prospects for enhancing the impact of health behaviour change evidence. We report a Health Psychology Review-specific review-of-reviews of trials of health behaviour change interventions published from inception to April 2020. We identified 34 reviews and assessed whether implementation readiness of behaviour change interventions was discussed. We then narratively review how implementation science has integrated theory/methods from health psychology and related discipline. Finally, we demonstrate how greater synergy between implementation science and health psychology could promote greater follow-through on advances made in the science of health behaviour change. publishedVersion

Supplemental material, sj-docx-2-hpq-10.1177_13591053221124748 for Health psychology and behavioral medicine researchers in Canada: An environmental scan by Kharah M Ross, Ryan Hoggan, Tavis S Campbell, Jennifer Gordon, Vincent Gosselin Boucher, Eric Kim, Kim Lavoie, Wolfgang Linden, Joshua A Rash, Codie R Rouleau, Sherry H Stewart and Justin Presseau in Journal of Health Psychology

Additional file 1: Table 1. AACTT specification of participant behaviour. Table 2. Topic guide for acceptability/feasibility focus groups in Phase 3. Table 3. Quotes from participants in the intervention co-production workshop. Table 4. Quotes from trial stakeholders in focus groups exploring intervention acceptability.

Supplemental material, sj-docx-4-cjk-10.1177_20543581221084502 for Protocol for a Process Evaluation of the Quality Improvement Intervention to Enhance Access to Kidney Transplantation and Living Kidney Donation (EnAKT LKD) Cluster-Randomized Clinical Trial by Seychelle Yohanna, Mackenzie Wilson, Kyla L. Naylor, Amit X. Garg, Jessica M. Sontrop, Dmitri Belenko, Lori Elliott, Susan McKenzie, Sara Macanovic, Istvan Mucsi, Rachel Patzer, Irina Voronin, Iris Lui, Peter G. Blake, Amy D. Waterman, Darin Treleaven and Justin Presseau in Canadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease

Additional file 3. Primary analyses modification effects.

Additional file 1.

Additional file 2: Appendix B. Example Usability Testing Interview Guide (Intersectionality Guide).

Supplemental Material, sj-pdf-2-qhr-10.1177_10497323221083353 for ���The Drug Use Unfortunately isn���t all Bad���: Chronic Disease Self-Management Complexity and Strategy Among Marginalized People Who Use Drugs by Lisa M. Boucher, Esther S. Shoemaker, Clare E. Liddy, Lynne Leonard, Paul A. MacPherson, Justin Presseau, Alana Martin, Dave Pineau, Christine Lalonde, Nic Diliso, Terry Lafleche, Michael Fitzgerald and Claire E. Kendall in Qualitative Health Research

Supplemental material, sj-docx-2-cjk-10.1177_20543581221084502 for Protocol for a Process Evaluation of the Quality Improvement Intervention to Enhance Access to Kidney Transplantation and Living Kidney Donation (EnAKT LKD) Cluster-Randomized Clinical Trial by Seychelle Yohanna, Mackenzie Wilson, Kyla L. Naylor, Amit X. Garg, Jessica M. Sontrop, Dmitri Belenko, Lori Elliott, Susan McKenzie, Sara Macanovic, Istvan Mucsi, Rachel Patzer, Irina Voronin, Iris Lui, Peter G. Blake, Amy D. Waterman, Darin Treleaven and Justin Presseau in Canadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease

Additional file 1. Criteria Prioritization Survey and Results.

Additional file 1: Appendix A. Development Committee Terms of Reference.

Additional file 1.

Additional file 5. Intersecting Categories Survey.

Additional file 3. Project Limitations Statement.

Supplemental material, sj-docx-2-cjk-10.1177_20543581221084502 for Protocol for a Process Evaluation of the Quality Improvement Intervention to Enhance Access to Kidney Transplantation and Living Kidney Donation (EnAKT LKD) Cluster-Randomized Clinical Trial by Seychelle Yohanna, Mackenzie Wilson, Kyla L. Naylor, Amit X. Garg, Jessica M. Sontrop, Dmitri Belenko, Lori Elliott, Susan McKenzie, Sara Macanovic, Istvan Mucsi, Rachel Patzer, Irina Voronin, Iris Lui, Peter G. Blake, Amy D. Waterman, Darin Treleaven and Justin Presseau in Canadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease

Additional file 4: Appendix D. Usability testing issues for development committee discussion and decisions.

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-hpq-10.1177_13591053221124748 for Health psychology and behavioral medicine researchers in Canada: An environmental scan by Kharah M Ross, Ryan Hoggan, Tavis S Campbell, Jennifer Gordon, Vincent Gosselin Boucher, Eric Kim, Kim Lavoie, Wolfgang Linden, Joshua A Rash, Codie R Rouleau, Sherry H Stewart and Justin Presseau in Journal of Health Psychology

Supplemental material, sj-pdf-1-cjk-10.1177_20543581221131201 for Enhance Access to Kidney Transplantation and Living Kidney Donation (EnAKT LKD): Statistical Analysis Plan of a Registry-Based, Cluster-Randomized Clinical Trial by Stephanie N. Dixon, Kyla L. Naylor, Seychelle Yohanna, Susan McKenzie, Dmitri Belenko, Peter G Blake, Candice Coghlan, Rebecca Cooper, Lori Elliott, Leah Getchell, Vincent Ki, Istvan Mucsi, Gihad Nesrallah, Rachel E. Patzer, Justin Presseau, Marian Reich, Jessica M. Sontrop, Darin Treleaven, Amy D. Waterman, Jeffrey Zaltzman and Amit X. Garg in Canadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease

Supplemental Material, sj-pdf-2-qhr-10.1177_10497323221083353 for ���The Drug Use Unfortunately isn���t all Bad���: Chronic Disease Self-Management Complexity and Strategy Among Marginalized People Who Use Drugs by Lisa M. Boucher, Esther S. Shoemaker, Clare E. Liddy, Lynne Leonard, Paul A. MacPherson, Justin Presseau, Alana Martin, Dave Pineau, Christine Lalonde, Nic Diliso, Terry Lafleche, Michael Fitzgerald and Claire E. Kendall in Qualitative Health Research

Additional file 4. Sensitivity analysis.

Additional file 3: Appendix C. Development committee discussions and decisions for tool drafts.

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-cjk-10.1177_20543581221084502 for Protocol for a Process Evaluation of the Quality Improvement Intervention to Enhance Access to Kidney Transplantation and Living Kidney Donation (EnAKT LKD) Cluster-Randomized Clinical Trial by Seychelle Yohanna, Mackenzie Wilson, Kyla L. Naylor, Amit X. Garg, Jessica M. Sontrop, Dmitri Belenko, Lori Elliott, Susan McKenzie, Sara Macanovic, Istvan Mucsi, Rachel Patzer, Irina Voronin, Iris Lui, Peter G. Blake, Amy D. Waterman, Darin Treleaven and Justin Presseau in Canadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease

Additional file 5: Final intersectionality and knowledge translation tools.

Additional file 2. Populations.

Supplemental material, sj-docx-4-cjk-10.1177_20543581221084502 for Protocol for a Process Evaluation of the Quality Improvement Intervention to Enhance Access to Kidney Transplantation and Living Kidney Donation (EnAKT LKD) Cluster-Randomized Clinical Trial by Seychelle Yohanna, Mackenzie Wilson, Kyla L. Naylor, Amit X. Garg, Jessica M. Sontrop, Dmitri Belenko, Lori Elliott, Susan McKenzie, Sara Macanovic, Istvan Mucsi, Rachel Patzer, Irina Voronin, Iris Lui, Peter G. Blake, Amy D. Waterman, Darin Treleaven and Justin Presseau in Canadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease

Additional file 2. MTFs selected for consideration.

Supplemental material, sj-docx-2-hpq-10.1177_13591053221124748 for Health psychology and behavioral medicine researchers in Canada: An environmental scan by Kharah M Ross, Ryan Hoggan, Tavis S Campbell, Jennifer Gordon, Vincent Gosselin Boucher, Eric Kim, Kim Lavoie, Wolfgang Linden, Joshua A Rash, Codie R Rouleau, Sherry H Stewart and Justin Presseau in Journal of Health Psychology

Supplemental material, sj-docx-3-cjk-10.1177_20543581221084502 for Protocol for a Process Evaluation of the Quality Improvement Intervention to Enhance Access to Kidney Transplantation and Living Kidney Donation (EnAKT LKD) Cluster-Randomized Clinical Trial by Seychelle Yohanna, Mackenzie Wilson, Kyla L. Naylor, Amit X. Garg, Jessica M. Sontrop, Dmitri Belenko, Lori Elliott, Susan McKenzie, Sara Macanovic, Istvan Mucsi, Rachel Patzer, Irina Voronin, Iris Lui, Peter G. Blake, Amy D. Waterman, Darin Treleaven and Justin Presseau in Canadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease

Supplemental material, sj-docx-3-cjk-10.1177_20543581221084502 for Protocol for a Process Evaluation of the Quality Improvement Intervention to Enhance Access to Kidney Transplantation and Living Kidney Donation (EnAKT LKD) Cluster-Randomized Clinical Trial by Seychelle Yohanna, Mackenzie Wilson, Kyla L. Naylor, Amit X. Garg, Jessica M. Sontrop, Dmitri Belenko, Lori Elliott, Susan McKenzie, Sara Macanovic, Istvan Mucsi, Rachel Patzer, Irina Voronin, Iris Lui, Peter G. Blake, Amy D. Waterman, Darin Treleaven and Justin Presseau in Canadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease

Supplemental Material, sj-pdf-1-qhr-10.1177_10497323221083353 for ���The Drug Use Unfortunately isn���t all Bad���: Chronic Disease Self-Management Complexity and Strategy Among Marginalized People Who Use Drugs by Lisa M. Boucher, Esther S. Shoemaker, Clare E. Liddy, Lynne Leonard, Paul A. MacPherson, Justin Presseau, Alana Martin, Dave Pineau, Christine Lalonde, Nic Diliso, Terry Lafleche, Michael Fitzgerald and Claire E. Kendall in Qualitative Health Research