2023 article

Engaging stakeholders in the use of an interactive simulation tool to support decision-making about the implementation of colorectal cancer screening interventions

Meghan. C. C. O'Leary, Lich, K. H., Mayorga, M. E. E., Hicklin, K., Davis, M. M. M., Brenner, A. T. T., … Wheeler, S. B. B. (2023, May 6). CANCER CAUSES & CONTROL.

By: . Meghan. C. C. O'Leary, K. Lich *, M. Mayorga n , K. Hicklin*, M. Davis *, A. Brenner *, D. Reuland *, S. Birken *, S. Wheeler *

author keywords: Decision-making; Simulation; Implementation; Evidence-based intervention; Colorectal cancer screening
TL;DR: To increase the tool’s utility, providing detailed guidance on how to implement the selected EBIs, and the extent to which users can expect similar CRC screening gains in their contexts, should be prioritized. (via Semantic Scholar)
UN Sustainable Development Goal Categories
Source: Web Of Science
Added: May 30, 2023

Abstract Purpose We aimed to understand how an interactive, web-based simulation tool can be optimized to support decision-making about the implementation of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) for improving colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Methods Interviews were conducted with decision-makers, including health administrators, advocates, and researchers, with a strong foundation in CRC prevention. Following a demonstration of the microsimulation modeling tool, participants reflected on the tool’s potential impact for informing the selection and implementation of strategies for improving CRC screening and outcomes. The interviews assessed participants’ preferences regarding the tool’s design and content, comprehension of the model results, and recommendations for improving the tool. Results Seventeen decision-makers completed interviews. Themes regarding the tool’s utility included building a case for EBI implementation, selecting EBIs to adopt, setting implementation goals, and understanding the evidence base. Reported barriers to guiding EBI implementation included the tool being too research-focused, contextual differences between the simulated and local contexts, and lack of specificity regarding the design of simulated EBIs. Recommendations to address these challenges included making the data more actionable, allowing users to enter their own model inputs, and providing a how-to guide for implementing the simulated EBIs. Conclusion Diverse decision-makers found the simulation tool to be most useful for supporting early implementation phases, especially deciding which EBI(s) to implement. To increase the tool’s utility, providing detailed guidance on how to implement the selected EBIs, and the extent to which users can expect similar CRC screening gains in their contexts, should be prioritized.