Implementation beyond the clinic: Community‐driven utilization of research evidence from PC CARES, a suicide prevention program. Issue 3 (28th June 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: White, Lauren A.; Wexler, Lisa; Weaver, Addie; Moto, Roberta; Kirk, Tanya; Rataj, Suzanne; Trout, Lucas; McEachern, Diane
• Is Part Of: American journal of community psychology. Volume 70:Issue 3/4(2022)
• Page Start: 365
• Page End: 378
• Publication Date: 2022-06-28
• Subjects: Alaska Native Health -- community‐based participatory research -- diffusion of innovation -- implementation science -- suicide prevention -- utilization of research evidence; Community psychology -- Periodicals; Community mental health services -- Periodicals; Community psychiatry -- Periodicals; Community Mental Health Services -- Periodicals; Community Psychiatry -- Periodicals; 155.905
• DOI: 10.1002/ajcp.12609
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0091-0562

Abstract

Abstract: While implementation and dissemination of research is a rapidly growing area, critical questions remain about how, why, and under what conditions everyday people integrate and utilize research evidence. This mixed‐methods study investigates how participants of Promoting Community Conversations About Research to End Suicide (PC CARES) make sense of and use research evidence about suicide prevention in their own lives. PC CARES is a health intervention addressing the need for culturally responsive suicide prevention practices in rural Alaska through a series of community Learning Circles. We analyzed PC CARES transcripts and surveys for 376 participants aged 15+ across 10 Northwest Alaska Native villages. Quantitative analysis showed significant correlations between five utilization of research evidence (URE) factors and participants' intent to use research evidence from PC CARES Learning Circles. Key qualitative themes from Learning Circle transcripts expanded upon these URE constructs and included navigating discordant information, centering relationships, and Indigenous worldviews as key to interpreting research evidence. We integrate and organize our findings to inform two domains from the Consolidated Framework for Research Implementation: (1) intervention characteristics and (2) characteristics of individuals, with emphasis on findings most relevant for community settings where self‐determined, evidence‐informed action is especially important for addressing health inequities. Highlights: Prioritizing local needs and contexts is key for implementing evidence‐supported practices in community settings. There is limited research on how community‐driven implementation may improve uptake and advance health equity. This study uses CFIR framework to assess community‐driven utilization of research evidence in community settings. Quantitative data shows correlations between URE and participants' intentions to act on research evidence. Qualitative findings describe how participants make meaning and plan to use presented research evidence.