Analytic hierarchy process: An innovative technique for culturally tailoring evidence‐based interventions to reduce health disparities. (7th January 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Corvin, Jaime A.; Chan, Isabella; Aguado Loi, Claudia X.; Dollman, Ian; Gonzales, Junius
• Is Part Of: Health expectations. Volume 24(2021)Supplement 1
• Page Start: 70
• Page End: 81
• Publication Date: 2020-01-07
• Subjects: chronic disease -- depression -- disparity -- Latino -- patient driven; Medical policy -- Periodicals; Public health -- Periodicals; Health planning -- Periodicals; 362.105
• DOI: 10.1111/hex.13022
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1369-6513

Abstract

Abstract: Latinos in the United States represent a disproportionate burden of illness and disease and face barriers to accessing health care and related resources. Culturally tailored, evidence‐based interventions hold promise in addressing many of these challenges. Yet, ensuring patient voice is vital in the successful development and implementation of such interventions. Thus, this paper examines the application of analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to inform the augmentation and implementation of an evidence‐based chronic disease self‐management programme for underserved Latinos living with both minor depression and chronic illness. The process of AHP allows for direct input from the individuals that would utilize such a programme, including afflicted individuals, their family members and the health educators/promotores that would be responsible for implementation. Specifically, 45 participants, including 15 individuals with chronic disease, 15 family members/caregivers and 15 promotores, partook in the Stakeholder Values Questionnaire, which elicited preferences and values regarding major goals, processes and content for the intervention. AHP was employed to analyse pairwise comparison ratings and to determine differences and similarities across stakeholder groups. This analytical technique allowed for the adaptation of the EBI to stakeholders' specific priorities and preferences and facilitated complex decision‐making. Findings not only shed light on similarities and differences between stakeholder groups, but also the magnitude of these priorities and preferences and allowed the intervention to be driven by the participants, themselves. Applying AHP was a unique opportunity to optimize the decision‐making process to inform cultural adaptation of an EBI while considering multiple viewpoints systematically.