Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39639262›Full record

Trial reportBMC health services research2024

Improving Lynch syndrome detection: a mixed-methods process evaluation of a hybrid type III effectiveness-implementation trial.

April Morrow, Rachel Baffsky, Kathy Tucker, Bonny Parkinson, Julia Steinberg, Priscilla Chan, Elizabeth Kennedy, Deborah Debono, Emily Hogden, Natalie Taylor

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialPragmatic Clinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

April MorrowImplementation to Impact (i2i), School of Population Health, Faculty of Medicine, UNSW, Samuels Building, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia. April.Morrow@unsw.edu.au.
Rachel BaffskyImplementation to Impact (i2i), School of Population Health, Faculty of Medicine, UNSW, Samuels Building, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia.
Kathy TuckerHereditary Cancer Clinic, Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Bonny ParkinsonCentre for the Health Economy, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Julia SteinbergThe Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW, New South Wales, Australia.
Priscilla ChanImplementation to Impact (i2i), School of Population Health, Faculty of Medicine, UNSW, Samuels Building, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia.
Elizabeth KennedyImplementation to Impact (i2i), School of Population Health, Faculty of Medicine, UNSW, Samuels Building, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia.
Deborah DebonoSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Emily HogdenImplementation to Impact (i2i), School of Population Health, Faculty of Medicine, UNSW, Samuels Building, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia.
Natalie TaylorImplementation to Impact (i2i), School of Population Health, Faculty of Medicine, UNSW, Samuels Building, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia.

Funding

Cancer Institute NSW 2017/CDF005
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTranslating evidence-based practices into real-world healthcare settings is challenging, particularly in the rapidly evolving field of genomics. A pragmatic two-arm cluster-randomized clinical trial (Hide and Seek Project - HaSP) tested two implementation approaches for improving hereditary cancer referral practices with one key distinction: implementation strategies that were designed 1) explicitly using psychological theory, or 2) using healthcare professional intuition. This mixed-methods process evaluation aimed to provide insights into how and why change occurred by examining contextual determinants, identifying mechanisms of action, and exploring the role of theory.

methodsPost-implementation interviews were conducted with Implementation Leads and clinicians from participating HaSP sites. Transcripts were analysed using a mixed inductive and deductive approach, guided by the updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (2.0). Findings were triangulated with other HaSP process evaluation data sources, including HaSP focus group observations, HaSP research team focus groups, MDT observations, and Implementation Lead project logs. Logic models and case studies were developed to articulate causal processes underlying strategy effectiveness and conditions necessary for implementation success.

resultsEighteen participants from seven HaSP sites were interviewed. Qualitative analysis identified themes related to Lynch syndrome complexity, pandemic disruptions, operational challenges, information technology constraints, multidisciplinary collaboration, cultural determinants, attitudes towards change, the value of theory, adaptations, and implementation support. Within these themes, a total of 39 contextual determinants were identified, with barriers and facilitators spanning 18 CFIR constructs across five domains. Logic models and case studies highlighted a number of mechanisms of action, producing variable clinical outcomes. Process evaluation findings, interpreted together with HaSP trial outcomes, indicate that theory-based implementation strategies may better support Lynch syndrome detection practices compared to intuition-based strategies.

conclusionsThe information gained from this process evaluation deepens understanding of the factors influencing the success of hospital-specific implementation strategies within the HaSP framework. Potential pathways for optimising the effectiveness of the overall HaSP implementation approach have been identified.

trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12618001072202. Registered 27 June 2018, https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=375348&isReview=true .

Indexed as

Colorectal Neoplasms, Hereditary NonpolyposisFemaleFocus GroupsHumansInterviews as TopicMaleQualitative ResearchReferral and ConsultationBehaviour change TechniquesCancerGeneticsGenomicsImplementation scienceLynch syndromePragmatic clinical trialStakeholder intuitionTheoretical domains framework

Identifiers

PMID39639262
PMCPMC11619127

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.