Testing a Motivational Interviewing Implementation Intervention in Adolescent HIV Clinics: Protocol for a Type 3, Hybrid Implementation-Effectiveness Trial
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Motivational interviewing (MI) has been shown to effectively improve self-management for youth living with HIV (YLH) and has demonstrated success across the youth HIV care cascade-currently, the only behavioral intervention to do so. Substantial barriers prevent the effective implementation of MI in real-world settings. Thus, there is a critical need to understand how to implement evidence-based practices (EBPs), such as MI, and promote behavior change in youth HIV treatment settings as risk-taking behaviors peak during adolescence and young adulthood. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to describe the Adolescent Medicine Trials Network for HIV/AIDS Interventions (ATN) protocol of a tailored MI (TMI) implementation-effectiveness trial (ATN 146 TMI) to scale up an EBP in multidisciplinary adolescent HIV settings while balancing flexibility and fidelity. This protocol is part of the Scale It Up program described in this issue. METHODS: This study is a type 3, hybrid implementation-effectiveness trial that tests the effect of TMI on fidelity (MI competency and adherence to program requirements) while integrating findings from two other ATN protocols described in this issue-ATN 153 Exploration, Preparations, Implementation, Sustainment and ATN 154 Cascade Monitoring. ATN 153 guides the mixed methods investigation of barriers and facilitators of implementation, while ATN 154 provides effectiveness outcomes. The TMI study population consists of providers at 10 adolescent HIV care sites around the United States. These 10 clinics are randomly assigned to 5 blocks to receive the TMI implementation intervention (workshop and trigger-based coaching guided by local implementation teams) utilizing the dynamic wait-listed controlled design. After 12 months of implementation, a second randomization compares a combination of internal facilitator coaching with the encouragement of communities of practice (CoPs) to CoPs alone. Participants receive MI competency assessments on a quarterly basis during preimplementation, during the 12 months of implementation and during the sustainment period for a total of 36 months. We hypothesize that MI competency ratings will be higher among providers during the TMI implementation phase compared with the standard care phase, and successful implementation will be associated with improved cascade-related outcomes, namely undetectable viral load and a greater number of clinic visits among YLH. RESULTS: Participant recruitment began in August 2017 and is ongoing. As of mid-May 2018, TMI has 150 active participants. CONCLUSIONS: This protocol describes the underlying theoretical framework, study design, measures, and lessons learned for TMI, a type 3, hybrid implementation-effectiveness trial, which has the potential to scale up MI and improve patient outcomes in adolescent HIV settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03681912; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03681912 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/754oT7Khx). INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/11200.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,025 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».