↓ Skip to main content

Supporting teams to optimize function and independence in Veterans: a multi-study program and mixed methods protocol

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, April 2018
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)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
23 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
118 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
Supporting teams to optimize function and independence in Veterans: a multi-study program and mixed methods protocol
Published in
Implementation Science, April 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13012-018-0748-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Virginia Wang, Kelli Allen, Courtney H. Van Houtven, Cynthia Coffman, Nina Sperber, Elizabeth P. Mahanna, Cathleen Colón-Emeric, Helen Hoenig, George L. Jackson, Teresa M. Damush, Erika Price, Susan N. Hastings

Abstract

Successful implementation of new clinical programs depends on effectively establishing, reorganizing, or enhancing team structures and processes to coordinate the work of individuals who are interdependent in their tasks, manage relationships, and share responsibility for outcomes. However, a one-size-fits-all approach is rarely effective. In partnership with VA national clinical leaders and local clinical champions, the Optimizing Function and Independence VA Quality Enhancement Research Initiative program (Function QUERI) will evaluate efforts to implement team-based clinical programs for Veterans at risk for functional decline and disability. Function QUERI will implement and evaluate three innovative, evidence-based clinical programs in VA medical centers: (1) a group physical therapy program for knee osteoarthritis (Group PT); (2) assisted early mobility for hospitalized older veterans (STRIDE), a supervised walking program for hospitalized older veterans; and (3) implementation of helping invested family members improve veteran experiences study (iHI-FIVES), a skills training program for caregivers of disabled Veterans. A common reason for clinical care gaps in these populations is poor communication and coordination among the many interdisciplinary providers involved in their care. To facilitate the implementation of the clinical programs, Function QUERI will evaluate the impact of complexity science-based implementation intervention to promote team readiness (CONNECT), an implementation intervention designed as a bundle of interaction-oriented activities to promote team function and readiness for change, on the implementation of clinical programs across multiple sites. The evaluation will use a mixed methods design. Group PT is a local, single-site quality improvement project where a modified CONNECT intervention will be tested to inform the remaining program implementation projects. For STRIDE and iHI-FIVES projects, we will randomize participating sites to implement the clinical program, with the CONNECT intervention or not, and will use a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial design. Function QUERI will translate its findings across its projects to identify the contextual factors and components from CONNECT that improve team processes and function to optimize effective implementation for future rollout of VA clinical programs. Synthesizing findings within and across projects, we will specify dimensions of team characteristics and function that enhance capacity for clinical innovation and uptake of evidence-based programs. NCT03300336 Registered September 28, 2017, NCT03474380 Registered March 15, 2018.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 23 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 118 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 118 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 10%
Researcher 11 9%
Student > Bachelor 9 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 7%
Other 25 21%
Unknown 39 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 17 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 14%
Social Sciences 7 6%
Psychology 6 5%
Sports and Recreations 3 3%
Other 17 14%
Unknown 52 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 10 November 2018.
All research outputs
#2,551,588
of 24,147,581 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#548
of 1,753 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,372
of 330,821 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#16
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,147,581 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,753 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 330,821 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 38 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 60% of its contemporaries.