Browsing by Author "Lorencatto, Fabiana"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Combined use of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF): a systematic review
    (2017-01-05) Birken, Sarah A; Powell, Byron J; Presseau, Justin; Kirk, M. A; Lorencatto, Fabiana; Gould, Natalie J; Shea, Christopher M; Weiner, Bryan J; Francis, Jill J; Yu, Yan; Haines, Emily; Damschroder, Laura J
    Abstract Background Over 60 implementation frameworks exist. Using multiple frameworks may help researchers to address multiple study purposes, levels, and degrees of theoretical heritage and operationalizability; however, using multiple frameworks may result in unnecessary complexity and redundancy if doing so does not address study needs. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) are both well-operationalized, multi-level implementation determinant frameworks derived from theory. As such, the rationale for using the frameworks in combination (i.e., CFIR + TDF) is unclear. The objective of this systematic review was to elucidate the rationale for using CFIR + TDF by (1) describing studies that have used CFIR + TDF, (2) how they used CFIR + TDF, and (2) their stated rationale for using CFIR + TDF. Methods We undertook a systematic review to identify studies that mentioned both the CFIR and the TDF, were written in English, were peer-reviewed, and reported either a protocol or results of an empirical study in MEDLINE/PubMed, PsycInfo, Web of Science, or Google Scholar. We then abstracted data into a matrix and analyzed it qualitatively, identifying salient themes. Findings We identified five protocols and seven completed studies that used CFIR + TDF. CFIR + TDF was applied to studies in several countries, to a range of healthcare interventions, and at multiple intervention phases; used many designs, methods, and units of analysis; and assessed a variety of outcomes. Three studies indicated that using CFIR + TDF addressed multiple study purposes. Six studies indicated that using CFIR + TDF addressed multiple conceptual levels. Four studies did not explicitly state their rationale for using CFIR + TDF. Conclusions Differences in the purposes that authors of the CFIR (e.g., comprehensive set of implementation determinants) and the TDF (e.g., intervention development) propose help to justify the use of CFIR + TDF. Given that the CFIR and the TDF are both multi-level frameworks, the rationale that using CFIR + TDF is needed to address multiple conceptual levels may reflect potentially misleading conventional wisdom. On the other hand, using CFIR + TDF may more fully define the multi-level nature of implementation. To avoid concerns about unnecessary complexity and redundancy, scholars who use CFIR + TDF and combinations of other frameworks should specify how the frameworks contribute to their study. Trial registration PROSPERO CRD42015027615
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    The co-development of a linguistic and culturally tailored tele-retinopathy screening intervention for immigrants living with diabetes from China and African-Caribbean countries in Ottawa, Canada
    (2023-03-29) Umaefulam, Valerie; Wilson, Mackenzie; Boucher, Marie C.; Brent, Michael H.; Dogba, Maman J.; Drescher, Olivia; Grimshaw, Jeremy M.; Ivers, Noah M.; Lawrenson, John G.; Lorencatto, Fabiana; Maberley, David; McCleary, Nicola; McHugh, Sheena; Sutakovic, Olivera; Thavorn, Kednapa; Witteman, Holly O.; Yu, Catherine; Cheng, Hao; Han, Wei; Hong, Yu; Idrissa, Balkissa; Leech, Tina; Malette, Joffré; Mongeon, Isabelle; Mugisho, Zawadi; Nguebou, Marlyse M.; Pabla, Sara; Rahman, Siffan; Samandoulougou, Azaratou; Visram, Hasina; You, Richard; Zhao, Junqiang; Presseau, Justin
    Abstract Background Diabetic retinopathy is a sight-threatening ocular complication of diabetes. Screening is an effective way to reduce severe complications, but screening attendance rates are often low, particularly for newcomers and immigrants to Canada and people from cultural and linguistic minority groups. Building on previous work, in partnership with patient and health system stakeholders, we co-developed a linguistically and culturally tailored tele-retinopathy screening intervention for people living with diabetes who recently immigrated to Canada from either China or African-Caribbean countries. Methods Following an environmental scan of diabetes eye care pathways in Ottawa, we conducted co-development workshops using a nominal group technique to create and prioritize personas of individuals requiring screening and identify barriers to screening that each persona may face. Next, we used the Theoretical Domains Framework to categorize the barriers/enablers and then mapped these categories to potential evidence-informed behaviour change techniques. Finally with these techniques in mind, participants prioritized strategies and channels of delivery, developed intervention content, and clarified actions required by different actors to overcome anticipated intervention delivery barriers. Results We carried out iterative co-development workshops with Mandarin and French-speaking individuals living with diabetes (i.e., patients in the community) who immigrated to Canada from China and African-Caribbean countries (n = 13), patient partners (n = 7), and health system partners (n = 6) recruited from community health centres in Ottawa. Patients in the community co-development workshops were conducted in Mandarin or French. Together, we prioritized five barriers to attending diabetic retinopathy screening: language (TDF Domains: skills, social influences), retinopathy familiarity (knowledge, beliefs about consequences), physician barriers regarding communication for screening (social influences), lack of publicity about screening (knowledge, environmental context and resources), and fitting screening around other activities (environmental context and resources). The resulting intervention included the following behaviour change techniques to address prioritized local barriers: information about health consequence, providing instructions on how to attend screening, prompts/cues, adding objects to the environment, social support, and restructuring the social environment. Operationalized delivery channels incorporated language support, pre-booking screening and sending reminders, social support via social media and community champions, and providing using flyers and videos as delivery channels. Conclusion Working with intervention users and stakeholders, we co-developed a culturally and linguistically relevant tele-retinopathy intervention to address barriers to attending diabetic retinopathy screening and increase uptake among two under-served groups.