Faculty Bibliography

INTRODUCTION/UNASSIGNED:Implementation is influenced by factors beyond individual clinical settings. Nevertheless, implementation research often focuses on factors related to individual providers and practices, potentially due to limitations of available frameworks. Extant frameworks do not adequately capture the myriad organizational influences on implementation. Organization theories capture diverse organizational influences but remain underused in implementation science. To advance their use among implementation scientists, we distilled 70 constructs from nine organization theories identified in our previous work into theoretical domains in the Organization Theory for Implementation Science (OTIS) framework. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:The process of distilling organization theory constructs into domains involved concept mapping and iterative consensus-building. First, we recruited organization and implementation scientists to participate in an online concept mapping exercise in which they sorted organization theory constructs into domains representing similar theoretical concepts. Multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analyses were used to produce visual representations (clusters) of the relationships among constructs in concept maps. Second, to interpret concept maps, we engaged members of the Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network (CPCRN) OTIS workgroup in consensus-building discussions. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Twenty-four experts participated in concept mapping. Based on resulting construct groupings' coherence, OTIS workgroup members selected the 10-cluster solution (from options of 7-13 clusters) and then reorganized clusters in consensus-building discussions to increase coherence. This process yielded six final OTIS domains: organizational characteristics (e.g., size; age); governance and operations (e.g., organizational and social subsystems); tasks and processes (e.g., technology cycles; excess capacity); knowledge and learning (e.g., tacit knowledge; sense making); characteristics of a population of organizations (e.g., isomorphism; selection pressure); and interorganizational relationships (e.g., dominance; interdependence). DISCUSSION/UNASSIGNED:Organizational influences on implementation are poorly understood, in part due to the limitations of extant frameworks. To improve understanding of organizational influences on implementation, we distilled 70 constructs from nine organization theories into six domains. Applications of the OTIS framework will enhance understanding of organizational influences on implementation, promote theory-driven strategies for organizational change, improve understanding of mechanisms underlying relationships between OTIS constructs and implementation, and allow for framework refinement. Next steps include testing the OTIS framework in implementation research and adapting it for use among policymakers and practitioners.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Little is known on the independent effects of generational status and acculturation on the consumption of specific foods among disaggregated Asian American (AA) populations. This study explores the associations of generational status and acculturation with dietary behaviors of a nationwide non-probability sample of 3018 AAs (57.6% East Asian American (EAA), 18.9% South Asian American (SAA), 19.4% Southeast Asian American (SEAA)). METHODS:Recruited participants completed an online dietary survey designed and adapted for AAs to assess a range of diet and food purchasing behaviors. Generational status was assessed through participant and parental country of birth (1st-Gen, 2nd-Gen, 3rd-Gen); the Marin Short Acculturation Scale was adapted to measure acculturation. Linear regression models assessed the association of generational status and acculturation with consumption of 11 food/nutrient groups, adjusted for socio-economic variables. RESULTS:Compared to estimated US averages, participants reported lower fruit, dairy, and seafood intake yet lower red and processed meat, and higher whole grain, calcium, and fiber intake. Compared to EAA, SAA reported higher dairy (1.72 vs. 1.46 cups/day) and calcium (1029 vs. 954 mg/day) intakes, while SEAA reported lower vegetable intake (1.66 vs. 1.78 cups/day). In adjusted analyses, processed meat intake was higher among 2nd-Gen and 3rd-Gen vs.1st-Gen (+0.029 times/day; +0.061 times/day) participants. Higher acculturation was associated with lower vegetable, fiber, and seafood intake (-0.005 cups/day; -0.02 g/day; -0.002 times/day). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Greater attention to the role of generational status and acculturation in AA dietary behaviors is needed, and findings call for further research to understand the mechanisms behind the dietary influence of different socialization and acculturative processes.

BACKGROUND:In several recent articles, authors have called for aligning the fields of implementation and improvement science. In this paper, we call for implementation science to also align with improvement practice. Multiple implementation scholars have highlighted the importance of designing implementation strategies to fit the existing culture, infrastructure, and practice of a healthcare system. Worldwide, healthcare systems are adopting improvement models as their primary approach to improving healthcare delivery and outcomes. The prevalence of improvement models raises the question of how implementation scientists might best align their efforts with healthcare systems' existing improvement infrastructure and practice. MAIN BODY/METHODS:We describe three challenges and five benefits to aligning implementation science and improvement practice. Challenges include (1) use of different models, terminology, and methods, (2) a focus on generalizable versus local knowledge, and (3) limited evidence in support of the effectiveness of improvement tools and methods. We contend that implementation science needs to move beyond these challenges and work toward greater alignment with improvement practice. Aligning with improvement practice would benefit implementation science by (1) strengthening research/practice partnerships, (2) fostering local ownership of implementation, (3) generating practice-based evidence, (4) developing context-specific implementation strategies, and (5) building practice-level capacity to implement interventions and improve care. Each of these potential benefits is illustrated in a case study from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:To effectively integrate evidence-based interventions into routine practice, implementation scientists need to align their efforts with the improvement culture and practice that is driving change within healthcare systems worldwide. This paper provides concrete examples of how researchers have aligned implementation science with improvement practice across five implementation projects.

No brief dietary screeners are available that capture dietary consumption patterns of Asian Americans. The purpose of this article is to describe the cultural adaptation of the validated Dietary Screener Questionnaire (DSQ) for use by clinicians, researchers, and community-based partners seeking to understand and intervene on dietary behaviors among English-speaking Asian Americans, for the six largest Asian subgroups (Chinese, Filipino, Asian Indian, Vietnamese, Korean, Japanese) in the United States. This was mainly accomplished by adding culturally specific examples of foods to the questionnaire items via searching online databases and soliciting input from members of our community partner network representing each of the six largest Asian subgroups. Over half of the 26 items on the DSQ were modified to include more culturally specific foods. Developing high-quality tools that reflect the diversity of the U.S. population are critical to implement nutrition interventions that do not inadvertently widen health disparities.

Purpose: Dietary behaviors are key modifiable risk factors in averting cardiovascular disease (CVD), the leading cause of morbidity, mortality, and disability in the United States. Before investing in adoption and implementation, community-based organizations, public health practitioners, and policymakers-often working with limited resources-need to compare the population health impacts of different food policies and programs to determine priorities, build capacity, and maximize resources. Numerous reports, reviews, and policy briefs have synthesized across evidence-based policies and programs to make recommendations, but few have made a deep acknowledgment that dietary policies and programs are not implemented in a vacuum, and that "real-world" settings are complex, multifaceted and dynamic. Methods: A narrative review was conducted of currently recommended evidence-based approaches to improving dietary behaviors, to describe and characterize applied and practical factors for consideration when adopting and implementing these dietary policies and programs across diverse settings. Results: From the narrative review, six key considerations emerged to guide community-based organizations, public health practitioners, and policymakers on moving from the evidence base, toward implementation in local and community settings. Conclusions: Considerations of "real-world" contextual factors are necessary and important when adopting and selecting evidence-based policies and programs to improve dietary behaviors and ultimately improve CVD outcomes. Promising approaches include those that apply community-partnered research and systems science to examine the equitable implementation of evidence-based dietary policies and programs.

The growth of dissemination and implementation (D&I) research over the last decade has produced a wealth of theories, frameworks, methods, strategies, and resources to inform the translation of evidence into wider practice. This article seeks to frame and orient researchers from the behavioral sciences to the rapidly growing interdisciplinary field of D&I science. We describe five domains across D&I research and practice: context assessment and intervention selection, dissemination, adaptation, implementation, and sustainability. We also discuss evaluation and communication as critical processes to drive ongoing learning and improvement across the five domains. In each section, we include widely cited literature and resources that readers may use to orient themselves to the field, and identify areas that they may want to explore further. This article organizes major areas of D&I science focusing on key definitions, approaches, and commonly used resources. It provides an introduction to researchers new to this area on how to conceptualize and navigate the field of D&I science, with the ultimate goal of increasing the reach and impact of evidence-based interventions.