Factors affecting adoption and implementation of a community-based children's mental health program: the Tapp-C example
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
While the efficacy of a number of interventions for various children's mental health problems has been established in academic and research laboratories, these interventions are not widely used in community children's mental health centers. Indeed, this "research-practice gap" in children's mental health service has been identified as one of the most pressing issues facing children's mental health. The present study examined the adoption, implementation, and adaptation of The Arson Prevention Program for Children (TAPP-C) by professionals in applied community settings. TAPP-C is collaborative, community-based assessment and intervention program for juvenile firesetters that was developed at a teaching hospital and disseminated to community-based settings throughout Ontario, Canada. Questionnaire data were gathered from community professionals, including children's mental health professionals and fire service professionals, who had attended educational events offered by TAPP-C. Questionnaire data were also gathered from administrators of the community agencies affiliated with these professionals. These data were used to evaluate the effects of the following factors on program adoption, level of use, and fidelity: (a) characteristics of the adopter, including innovativeness, concern about juvenile firesetting, self-efficacy for addressing firesetting, and attitudes toward TAPP-C; (b) characteristics of the program, including perceived complexity, perceived compatibility with existing practice and perceived relative advantage over existing practice; (c) dissemination experiences, including exposure to TAPP-C educational strategies and perceived availability of TAPP-C expert consultation; and (d) perceived inter-organization collaboration in the local community. Results indicated that adoption of TAPP-C was primarily related to perceived characteristics of the innovation and dissemination experiences. Level of use of TAPP-C, on the other hand, was primarily related to the respondents' self-efficacy for addressing firesetting, their dissemination experiences, and their perception of inter-organization collaboration in their local community. Interestingly, the majority of community professionals reported high levels of implementation fidelity. The implications of these findings for closing the research-practice gap in children's mental health are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,036 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».