Search

Background: Evidence should guide decisions in aphasia practice across the continuum of stroke care; however, evidence–practice gaps persist. This is particularly pertinent in the acute setting where 30% of people with stroke will have aphasia, and speech pathologists experience many challenges implementing evidence‐based practice. This has important consequences for people with aphasia and their close others, as well as speech pathologists working in acute settings. Aims: This study protocol details how we will target practice change using a behavioural approach, with the aim of promoting the uptake of synthesized evidence in aphasia management post‐stroke in the acute hospital setting. Methods & Procedures: We will conduct a mixed‐methods before‐and‐after study following the Knowledge‐to‐Action (KTA) framework. Researchers, speech pathologists and people with lived experience of aphasia will collaborate to identify and prioritize practice gaps, and develop and implement changes to clinical practice based on the Theoretical Domains Framework and Behaviour Change Wheel. Discussion: This study may provide a template for acute stroke services in how to use an implementation science approach to promote the application of synthesized evidence into routine clinical practice to ensure people with aphasia receive high‐quality services. Collaboration among researchers, healthcare providers, people with aphasia and their close others ensures that the identification and targeting of practice gaps are driven by theory, lived experience and the local context. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject: Synthesized evidence, such as clinical guidelines and consensus statements, provides the highest level of evidence to inform clinical practice, yet discrepancies between delivered care and evidence remain. This discrepancy is of note in the acute setting where clinicians report many challenges implementing the best available evidence, combined with a high proportion of people with stroke who will have aphasia (30%). There are many reasons why evidence is not put into practice, and efforts to change clinical practice need to consider these barriers when developing interventions. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This study protocol details an implementation science approach to affect clinical practice change, informed by a collaboration of key stakeholders (researchers, speech pathologists, and people with aphasia and their close others). Protocol papers that focus on bridging the gap between evidence and practice are uncommon in communication disorders; moreover, explicit prioritization of practice gaps is a critical but often overlooked aspect of promoting evidence‐based practice. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: This protocol provides insights into how one study site identified and prioritized evidence–practice gaps using a participatory approach. We provide insights into how clinical practice change may occur by describing how we plan to identify priority evidence–practice gaps and develop an intervention to improve the use of aphasia evidence in routine practice. This protocol aims to share an implementation science approach to service improvement that may be replicated across other services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research involving international research communities has been advocated in the field of behavior analysis (Dymond et al., 2000; Martin et al., 2016). The purpose of the present study was to report the status of behavioral research in mainland China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan, in terms of number of publications, types of research, and frequency of collaboration with international researchers. Fifteen behavioral journals were selected from the list by Cooper et al. (2020). These were searched by hand to find publications conducted in or authored by researchers from mainland China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan dating from each journal's inception to December 2021. The earliest publication we found appeared in 1980 in The Psychological Record. Over the following four decades (1980–1989; 1990–1999; 2000–2009; 2010–2021), the number of publications per decade increased dramatically and continues in recent years to rise. Publications include research reports, review papers, and conceptual articles, with the majority being basic research reports published in Behavioral Processes. Approximately half the publications involve collaboration with international researchers, mostly in North America. Implications for behavioral research, practice, and policy in mainland China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Farmers face a range of factors that negatively influence their mental health and suicide risk, yet have limited access to appropriate support. Behavioural activation (BA) is an evidence‐based therapy that can be effectively delivered by nonclinical workers. Working with members of farming communities to deliver BA to their peers has the potential to overcome many well‐established barriers to mental health help‐seeking and improve outcomes for this at‐risk group. Objective: This paper describes the findings of a co‐design phase informing the development of a peer (farmer)‐led approach for delivering BA for farmers living with depression or low mood. Design: This qualitative study used a co‐design approach involving members of the target community. Focus groups were transcribed and analysed using Thematic Analysis and the Framework approach. Findings: Ten online focus groups with 22 participants were held over 3 months. Four overarching, interlinked themes were identified: (i) filling the gap in rural mental health support; (ii) alignment with the farming context—tailoring how, where and when we engage about mental health; (iii) the 'messenger' is as important as the message; and (iv) sustainability, governance and support. Discussion: Findings suggest BA could be a contextually appropriate model of support for the farming community—given its practical and solution‐focused approach—and could help improve access to support. Having peer workers deliver the intervention was viewed as appropriate. Ensuring governance structures are developed to support peers to deliver the intervention will be essential to facilitate effectiveness, safety and sustainability. Conclusion: Insights gained through co‐design have been critical to the success of developing this new model of support for members of farming communities experiencing depression or low mood. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 1948, Skinner described the behavior of pigeons under response‐independent schedules as "superstitious," and proposed that the responses were reinforced by contiguous, adventitious food deliveries. Subsequently, response‐independent schedules have been of interest to both basic and applied researchers, first to understand the mechanisms involved, and later, as "noncontingent reinforcement" (NCR) to reduce undesirable behavior. However, the potential superstitious effects produced by these schedules have been challenged, with some researchers arguing that antecedent variables play a significant role. This paper examines the evidence for adventitious reinforcement from both laboratory and applied research, the results of which suggest that antecedent, nonoperant functions may be important in fully understanding the effects of NCR. We propose an applied‐basic research synthesis, in which attention to potential nonoperant functions could provide a more complete understanding of response‐independent schedules. We conclude with a summary of the applied implications of the nonoperant functions of NCR schedules. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: University researchers worked with 13 children's service provider agencies to conduct a programme evaluation of parents' perceptions of the family‐centredness of service spanning 3 years (January 2015 to May 2018). Parents of Ontario children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) receiving applied behaviour analysis (ABA) programming reported outcomes of their experience of family‐centred services (FCS) using the 20‐item Measure of Processes of Care (MPOC‐20). The purpose of this paper is to report the outcomes of the quality assurance evaluation of FCS as measured by MPOC‐20 among parents of children with ASD receiving ABA services. Methods: A total of 11 490 surveys (from 21 571 potential respondents [53.3%]) were completed. Means and proportions were used to describe the demographics, service utilization and MPOC‐20 scores with its 7‐point Likert scales, ranging from 1 (lowest) to 7 (highest). Results: The overall provincial MPOC scores were consistent over the 3 years, ranging from very good to excellent, with Respectful and Supportive Care (n = 11 348, x¯ = 6.27, SD = 0.83) reporting the highest scale score and Providing General Information (n = 10 485, x¯ = 5.51, SD = 1.43) the lowest. Conclusion: Given the consistently high MPOC scores found in this and other programme evaluations, it is believed that health service providers have caught up to the FCS quality standards proposed 30 years ago. For this reason, the developers of MPOC are now planning a revision of the measure to address its ceiling effects and to integrate contemporary perspectives on family‐centred practice for children and their families. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present paper takes a translational approach in applying the themes of the current special section to prevention and intervention science in Latino families. The paper reviews the current literature on cultural processes in prevention and intervention research with Latino families. Overall, many prevention and intervention programs have either been developed specifically for Latino families or have been modified for Latino families with great attention paid to the socio-cultural needs of these families. Nevertheless, few studies have tested the role of cultural values or acculturation processes on outcomes. We make recommendations based on findings within basic science and in particular this special section on the incorporation of these values and processes into prevention and intervention science with Latino families. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]