Show simple item record

Best–worst scaling methodology to evaluate constructs of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research: application to the implementation of pharmacogenetic testing for antidepressant therapy

dc.contributor.authorSalloum, Ramzi G.
dc.contributor.authorBishop, Jeffrey R.
dc.contributor.authorElchynski, Amanda L.
dc.contributor.authorSmith, D. M.
dc.contributor.authorRowe, Elizabeth
dc.contributor.authorBlake, Kathryn V.
dc.contributor.authorLimdi, Nita A.
dc.contributor.authorAquilante, Christina L.
dc.contributor.authorBates, Jill
dc.contributor.authorBeitelshees, Amber L.
dc.contributor.authorCipriani, Amber
dc.contributor.authorDuong, Benjamin Q.
dc.contributor.authorEmpey, Philip E.
dc.contributor.authorFormea, Christine M.
dc.contributor.authorHicks, J. K.
dc.contributor.authorMroz, Pawel
dc.contributor.authorOslin, David
dc.contributor.authorPasternak, Amy L.
dc.contributor.authorPetry, Natasha
dc.contributor.authorRamsey, Laura B.
dc.contributor.authorSchlichte, Allyson
dc.contributor.authorSwain, Sandra M.
dc.contributor.authorWard, Kristen M.
dc.contributor.authorWiisanen, Kristin
dc.contributor.authorSkaar, Todd C.
dc.contributor.authorVan Driest, Sara L.
dc.contributor.authorCavallari, Larisa H.
dc.contributor.authorTuteja, Sony
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-10T18:56:55Z
dc.date.available2022-08-10T18:56:55Z
dc.date.issued2022-05-14
dc.identifier.citationImplementation Science Communications. 2022 May 14;3(1):52
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-022-00300-7
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/174087en
dc.description.abstractAbstract Background Despite the increased demand for pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing to guide antidepressant use, little is known about how to implement testing in clinical practice. Best–worst scaling (BWS) is a stated preferences technique for determining the relative importance of alternative scenarios and is increasingly being used as a healthcare assessment tool, with potential applications in implementation research. We conducted a BWS experiment to evaluate the relative importance of implementation factors for PGx testing to guide antidepressant use. Methods We surveyed 17 healthcare organizations that either had implemented or were in the process of implementing PGx testing for antidepressants. The survey included a BWS experiment to evaluate the relative importance of Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) constructs from the perspective of implementing sites. Results Participating sites varied on their PGx testing platform and methods for returning recommendations to providers and patients, but they were consistent in ranking several CFIR constructs as most important for implementation: patient needs/resources, leadership engagement, intervention knowledge/beliefs, evidence strength and quality, and identification of champions. Conclusions This study demonstrates the feasibility of using choice experiments to systematically evaluate the relative importance of implementation determinants from the perspective of implementing organizations. BWS findings can inform other organizations interested in implementing PGx testing for mental health. Further, this study demonstrates the application of BWS to PGx, the findings of which may be used by other organizations to inform implementation of PGx testing for mental health disorders.
dc.titleBest–worst scaling methodology to evaluate constructs of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research: application to the implementation of pharmacogenetic testing for antidepressant therapy
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/174087/1/43058_2022_Article_300.pdf
dc.identifier.doihttps://dx.doi.org/10.7302/5818
dc.language.rfc3066en
dc.rights.holderThe Author(s)
dc.date.updated2022-08-10T18:56:55Z
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.