Influence network linkages across implementation strategy conditions in a randomized controlled trial of two strategies for scaling up evidence-based practices in public youth-serving systems

Lawrence A. Palinkas, Ian W. Holloway, Eric Rice, C. H. Brown, Thomas W. Valente, Patricia Chamberlain

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Given the importance of influence networks in the implementation of evidence-based practices and interventions, it is unclear whether such networks continue to operate as sources of information and advice when they are segmented and disrupted by randomization to different implementation strategy conditions. The present study examines the linkages across implementation strategy conditions of social influence networks of leaders of youth-serving systems in 12 California counties participating in a randomized controlled trial of community development teams (CDTs) to scale up use of an evidence-based practice.Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 38 directors, assistant directors, and program managers of county probation, mental health, and child welfare departments. A web-based survey collected additional quantitative data on information and advice networks of study participants. A mixed-methods approach to data analysis was used to create a sociometric data set (n = 176) to examine linkages between treatment and standard conditions.Results: Of those network members who were affiliated with a county (n = 137), only 6 (4.4%) were directly connected to a member of the opposite implementation strategy condition; 19 (13.9%) were connected by two steps or fewer to a member of the opposite implementation strategy condition; 64 (46.7%) were connected by three or fewer steps to a member of the opposite implementation strategy condition. Most of the indirect steps between individuals who were in different implementation strategy conditions were connections involving a third non-county organizational entity that had an important role in the trial in keeping the implementation strategy conditions separate. When these entities were excluded, the CDT network exhibited fewer components and significantly higher betweenness centralization than did the standard condition network.Conclusion: Although the integrity of the RCT in this instance was not compromised by study participant influence networks, RCT designs should consider how influence networks may extend beyond boundaries established by the randomization process in implementation studies.Trial registration: NCT00880126.

Original languageEnglish
Article number133
JournalImplementation Science
Volume8
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 14 2013

Fingerprint

Social Planning
Evidence-Based Practice
Random Allocation
Randomized Controlled Trials
Information Services
Child Welfare
Social Support
Mental Health
Interviews
Therapeutics
Surveys and Questionnaires
Datasets
4-phenyl-alpha-methylphenylacetate gamma-propylsulfonate

Keywords

  • Design
  • Evidence-based practice
  • Implementation
  • Randomized controlled trial
  • Social networks

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy
  • Medicine(all)
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Health Informatics

Cite this

Influence network linkages across implementation strategy conditions in a randomized controlled trial of two strategies for scaling up evidence-based practices in public youth-serving systems. / Palinkas, Lawrence A.; Holloway, Ian W.; Rice, Eric; Brown, C. H.; Valente, Thomas W.; Chamberlain, Patricia.

In: Implementation Science, Vol. 8, No. 1, 133, 14.11.2013.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Palinkas, Lawrence A. ; Holloway, Ian W. ; Rice, Eric ; Brown, C. H. ; Valente, Thomas W. ; Chamberlain, Patricia. / Influence network linkages across implementation strategy conditions in a randomized controlled trial of two strategies for scaling up evidence-based practices in public youth-serving systems. In: Implementation Science. 2013 ; Vol. 8, No. 1.
@article{83ab361d060f4335858eac3809e8bde2,
title = "Influence network linkages across implementation strategy conditions in a randomized controlled trial of two strategies for scaling up evidence-based practices in public youth-serving systems",
abstract = "Background: Given the importance of influence networks in the implementation of evidence-based practices and interventions, it is unclear whether such networks continue to operate as sources of information and advice when they are segmented and disrupted by randomization to different implementation strategy conditions. The present study examines the linkages across implementation strategy conditions of social influence networks of leaders of youth-serving systems in 12 California counties participating in a randomized controlled trial of community development teams (CDTs) to scale up use of an evidence-based practice.Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 38 directors, assistant directors, and program managers of county probation, mental health, and child welfare departments. A web-based survey collected additional quantitative data on information and advice networks of study participants. A mixed-methods approach to data analysis was used to create a sociometric data set (n = 176) to examine linkages between treatment and standard conditions.Results: Of those network members who were affiliated with a county (n = 137), only 6 (4.4{\%}) were directly connected to a member of the opposite implementation strategy condition; 19 (13.9{\%}) were connected by two steps or fewer to a member of the opposite implementation strategy condition; 64 (46.7{\%}) were connected by three or fewer steps to a member of the opposite implementation strategy condition. Most of the indirect steps between individuals who were in different implementation strategy conditions were connections involving a third non-county organizational entity that had an important role in the trial in keeping the implementation strategy conditions separate. When these entities were excluded, the CDT network exhibited fewer components and significantly higher betweenness centralization than did the standard condition network.Conclusion: Although the integrity of the RCT in this instance was not compromised by study participant influence networks, RCT designs should consider how influence networks may extend beyond boundaries established by the randomization process in implementation studies.Trial registration: NCT00880126.",
keywords = "Design, Evidence-based practice, Implementation, Randomized controlled trial, Social networks",
author = "Palinkas, {Lawrence A.} and Holloway, {Ian W.} and Eric Rice and Brown, {C. H.} and Valente, {Thomas W.} and Patricia Chamberlain",
year = "2013",
month = "11",
day = "14",
doi = "10.1186/1748-5908-8-133",
language = "English",
volume = "8",
journal = "Implementation Science",
issn = "1748-5908",
publisher = "BioMed Central",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Influence network linkages across implementation strategy conditions in a randomized controlled trial of two strategies for scaling up evidence-based practices in public youth-serving systems

AU - Palinkas, Lawrence A.

AU - Holloway, Ian W.

AU - Rice, Eric

AU - Brown, C. H.

AU - Valente, Thomas W.

AU - Chamberlain, Patricia

PY - 2013/11/14

Y1 - 2013/11/14

N2 - Background: Given the importance of influence networks in the implementation of evidence-based practices and interventions, it is unclear whether such networks continue to operate as sources of information and advice when they are segmented and disrupted by randomization to different implementation strategy conditions. The present study examines the linkages across implementation strategy conditions of social influence networks of leaders of youth-serving systems in 12 California counties participating in a randomized controlled trial of community development teams (CDTs) to scale up use of an evidence-based practice.Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 38 directors, assistant directors, and program managers of county probation, mental health, and child welfare departments. A web-based survey collected additional quantitative data on information and advice networks of study participants. A mixed-methods approach to data analysis was used to create a sociometric data set (n = 176) to examine linkages between treatment and standard conditions.Results: Of those network members who were affiliated with a county (n = 137), only 6 (4.4%) were directly connected to a member of the opposite implementation strategy condition; 19 (13.9%) were connected by two steps or fewer to a member of the opposite implementation strategy condition; 64 (46.7%) were connected by three or fewer steps to a member of the opposite implementation strategy condition. Most of the indirect steps between individuals who were in different implementation strategy conditions were connections involving a third non-county organizational entity that had an important role in the trial in keeping the implementation strategy conditions separate. When these entities were excluded, the CDT network exhibited fewer components and significantly higher betweenness centralization than did the standard condition network.Conclusion: Although the integrity of the RCT in this instance was not compromised by study participant influence networks, RCT designs should consider how influence networks may extend beyond boundaries established by the randomization process in implementation studies.Trial registration: NCT00880126.

AB - Background: Given the importance of influence networks in the implementation of evidence-based practices and interventions, it is unclear whether such networks continue to operate as sources of information and advice when they are segmented and disrupted by randomization to different implementation strategy conditions. The present study examines the linkages across implementation strategy conditions of social influence networks of leaders of youth-serving systems in 12 California counties participating in a randomized controlled trial of community development teams (CDTs) to scale up use of an evidence-based practice.Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 38 directors, assistant directors, and program managers of county probation, mental health, and child welfare departments. A web-based survey collected additional quantitative data on information and advice networks of study participants. A mixed-methods approach to data analysis was used to create a sociometric data set (n = 176) to examine linkages between treatment and standard conditions.Results: Of those network members who were affiliated with a county (n = 137), only 6 (4.4%) were directly connected to a member of the opposite implementation strategy condition; 19 (13.9%) were connected by two steps or fewer to a member of the opposite implementation strategy condition; 64 (46.7%) were connected by three or fewer steps to a member of the opposite implementation strategy condition. Most of the indirect steps between individuals who were in different implementation strategy conditions were connections involving a third non-county organizational entity that had an important role in the trial in keeping the implementation strategy conditions separate. When these entities were excluded, the CDT network exhibited fewer components and significantly higher betweenness centralization than did the standard condition network.Conclusion: Although the integrity of the RCT in this instance was not compromised by study participant influence networks, RCT designs should consider how influence networks may extend beyond boundaries established by the randomization process in implementation studies.Trial registration: NCT00880126.

KW - Design

KW - Evidence-based practice

KW - Implementation

KW - Randomized controlled trial

KW - Social networks

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84887337169&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84887337169&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1186/1748-5908-8-133

DO - 10.1186/1748-5908-8-133

M3 - Article

C2 - 24229373

AN - SCOPUS:84887337169

VL - 8

JO - Implementation Science

JF - Implementation Science

SN - 1748-5908

IS - 1

M1 - 133

ER -