↓ Skip to main content

Testing the implementation and sustainment facilitation (ISF) strategy as an effective adjunct to the Addiction Technology Transfer Center (ATTC) strategy: study protocol for a cluster randomized…

Overview of attention for article published in Addiction Science & Clinical Practice, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
16 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Testing the implementation and sustainment facilitation (ISF) strategy as an effective adjunct to the Addiction Technology Transfer Center (ATTC) strategy: study protocol for a cluster randomized trial
Published in
Addiction Science & Clinical Practice, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13722-017-0096-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bryan R. Garner, Mark Zehner, Mathew R. Roosa, Steve Martino, Heather J. Gotham, Elizabeth L. Ball, Patricia Stilen, Kathryn Speck, Denna Vandersloot, Traci R. Rieckmann, Michael Chaple, Erika G. Martin, David Kaiser, James H. Ford

Abstract

Improving the extent to which evidence-based practices (EBPs)-treatments that have been empirically shown to be efficacious or effective-are integrated within routine practice is a well-documented challenge across numerous areas of health. In 2014, the National Institute on Drug Abuse funded a type 2 effectiveness-implementation hybrid trial titled the substance abuse treatment to HIV Care (SAT2HIV) Project. Aim 1 of the SAT2HIV Project tests the effectiveness of a motivational interviewing-based brief intervention (MIBI) for substance use as an adjunct to usual care within AIDS service organizations (ASOs) as part of its MIBI Experiment. Aim 2 of the SAT2HIV Project tests the effectiveness of implementation and sustainment facilitation (ISF) as an adjunct to the Addiction Technology Transfer Center (ATTC) model for training staff in motivational interviewing as part of its ISF Experiment. The current paper describes the study protocol for the ISF Experiment. Using a cluster randomized design, case management and leadership staff from 39 ASOs across the United States were randomized to receive either the ATTC strategy (control condition) or the ATTC + ISF strategy (experimental condition). The ATTC strategy is staff-focused and includes 10 discrete strategies (e.g., provide centralized technical assistance, conduct educational meetings, provide ongoing consultation). The ISF strategy is organization-focused and includes seven discrete strategies (e.g., use an implementation advisor, organize implementation team meetings, conduct cyclical small tests of change). Building upon the exploration-preparation-implementation-sustainment (EPIS) framework, the effectiveness of the ISF strategy is examined via three staff-level measures: (1) time-to-proficiency (i.e., preparation phase outcome), (2) implementation effectiveness (i.e., implementation phase outcome), and (3) level of sustainment (i.e., sustainment phase outcome). Although not without limitations, the ISF experiment has several strengths: a highly rigorous design (randomized, hypothesis-driven), high-need setting (ASOs), large sample size (39 ASOs), large geographic representation (23 states and the District of Columbia), and testing along multiple phases of the EPIS continuum (preparation, implementation, and sustainment). Thus, study findings will significantly improve generalizable knowledge regarding the best preparation, implementation, and sustainment strategies for advancing EBPs along the EPIS continuum. Moreover, increasing ASO's capacity to address substance use may improve the HIV Care Continuum. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03120598.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 68 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 13%
Researcher 7 10%
Librarian 6 9%
Student > Master 5 7%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Other 17 25%
Unknown 19 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 25%
Psychology 10 15%
Social Sciences 6 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 4%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 21 31%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 October 2019.
All research outputs
#2,443,659
of 19,884,221 outputs
Outputs from Addiction Science & Clinical Practice
#86
of 368 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,362
of 428,465 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Addiction Science & Clinical Practice
#10
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,884,221 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 368 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 428,465 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.