Oregon's decision makers (e.g., community service providers, public health, justice, advocacy groups, payers) are calling for comprehensive, current, and trusted data to inform how they allocate resources to improve substance use services and mitigate the growing opioid and methamphetamine epidemics in their state. Consistent with the HEAL Data2Action call for Innovation projects that drive action with data in real-world settings, this study will refine and test the impact of a novel implementation strategy to engage cross- sector decision makers and make data that they identify as relevant to their decisions available to them in easy- to-use products. The proposed study aims to not only address critical knowledge gaps regarding how and when data can inform impactful, transparent decision-making, but to provide decision makers with the data that they need to achieve community-wide substance use prevention and treatment goals, including the increased delivery of high-quality, evidence-informed, services and the prevention of overdoses.
At least 18 years old
Has decision-making authority within their professional role related to substance use service delivery, including leadership responsible for developing policy (e.g. executive directors) OR middle-managers (e.g., case managers, supervisor) and front-line workers responsible for service delivery decisions OR Responsible for developing local or state policy related to substance use/behavioral health and/or the criminal justice system OR Advises these decision makers (e.g., legislative staff, data analysts)
At least 18 years old
Has decision-making authority within their professional role related to substance use service delivery, including leadership responsible for developing policy (e.g. executive directors) OR middle-managers (e.g., case managers, supervisor) and front-line workers responsible for service delivery decisions OR Responsible for developing local or state policy related to substance use/behavioral health and/or the criminal justice system OR Advises these decision makers (e.g., legislative staff, data analysts)
None.
Sequential
Co-Design Sessions (CDS)
Other interventionCDS uses principles and activities from Liberating Structures (LS) and Group Model Building (GMB). Each method uses semi-structured processes for engaging partners to collaborate with one another and address complex problems. Example activities and discussions include: identifying a shared vision for how data can inform decisions related to substance use service delivery and overdose prevention; identifying relevant data that should be disseminated; identifying decisions to be supported with data. Methods from human-centered design - an approach for developing products that are useful and easy to use - will be used to refine data products developed by the study team so that the data products are acceptable and useful to end users. Together, these three methods (Liberating Structures, group model building, human-centered design) will be used to engage partners to iteratively co-design products for disseminating data back to partners to inform their daily substance use service delivery.
Data products
Other interventionData products disseminate localized data from local, state, or regional-level data sources to local (i.e., county) decision makers to inform their daily decision-making. Data products in counties assigned to CDS will receive fully tailored data products, while no-CDS counties will receive standardized data products. A suite of data products will be made available to inform diverse decisions by a variety of end users. Data products will be identified and prioritized during CDS, but may include reports, policy briefs, journey maps, and technical assistance for data interpretation.
Community Engagement Survey
A measure of community engagement (Oetzel et al, 2018) which includes 2 subscales; collaboration, which includes 4 items answered on a Likert Scale ranging from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree, and synergy, which includes 7 items answered on a Likert Scale ranging from Not at All to To a Great Extent.
Data Product Usability
Acceptability and Usability of the Data Products will be assessed through the System Usability Scale, a 10-item measure that will be tailored for the current study. Scoring is from 1 - 5, with 1 indicating "Strongly disagree" and 5 indicating "Strongly agree".
Social Network of Collaboration
A study-specific measure will probe about connections that facilitate collaboration, defined as clinical referrals and client care coordination. Questions probe presence and strength of ties (e.g., whether referrals sent and/or received from other organizations). Open-ended questions probe timing, nature, and origin of collaborations (e.g., nodes).
Trust in data
A measure of trust in data (Yoon \& Lee, 2019) was tailored for the current study. Tailoring including removing items and slight rewording of item stems (e.g., "data system" to "data"). The study measure includes 5 items answered on a Likert Scale ranging from 1= Strongly Disagree to 5 = Strongly Agree and including 0 = don't know.
Data Product: Missing Data
The percentage of missing data (secondary data requested by the study team but not shared for any reason by local entities) will be compared across conditions.
Focus Groups
Quantitative outcomes and the study's motivating theoretical frameworks -primarily the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework- will inform focus group discussion guides.
Evidence Use Behavior
Seven questions from Pew Health that were adopted for another NIDA-funded study are being used to assess decision makers' trust in evidence use and perceived skills to use evidence. 4 questions have a yes/no response, while 3 questions have a Likert-type response ranging from "Not at all" to "Extremely" or "Not Applicable to me in my role"
Click on the lead sponsor to view all of their trials.
Chestnut Health Systems
Lead sponsor
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
Collaborator
University of California, San Diego
Collaborator
