Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Am J Prev Med. 2014 Aug;47(2):212-9. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2014.03.007. Epub 2014 Jun 18.

Conducting rapid, relevant research: lessons learned from the My Own Health Report project.

Author information

1
Colorado Health Outcomes Program, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Denver, Colorado. Electronic address: russell.glasgow@ucdenver.edu.
2
Department of Family Medicine, University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont.
3
Department of Health Promotion and Community Health Sciences, Texas A&M Health Science School of Public Health, College Station, Texas.
4
Department of Health Policy and Management, University of California, Los Angeles, California.
5
Senior Scientific Consultant, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, Maryland; Director of New York Physicians against Cancer, Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbia University, New York.
6
Department of Family Medicine and Population Health, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia.

Abstract

The lengthy and uncertain translation of research into clinical practice is well documented. Much of the current "gold standard" clinical research is slow, expensive, and lacks perceived relevance for practitioners and decision makers. In contrast, we summarize experiences conducting the My Own Health Report (MOHR) project to collect and address patient reported measures using principles of rapid, relevant pragmatic research. The methods used for rapid design and fielding of the MOHR project to improve attention to health behaviors and mental health are detailed. Within the multisite, pragmatic, implementation-focused MOHR study, we describe the four phases of the research and the key decisions made and actions taken within each. We provide concrete examples of how relevant research can be conducted transparently to rapidly provide information to practitioners. Data were collected and analyzed in 2013. The multisite (seven research centers partnered with 18 clinics) cluster randomized pragmatic delayed intervention trial was conducted in less than 18 months from receipt of funding applications to completion of data collection. Phases that were especially accelerated included funding and review, and recruitment and implementation. Conducting complex studies rapidly and efficiently is a realistic goal. Key lessons learned for prevention research include use of existing research networks; use of web-based assessment/feedback tools that are tailored to fit local needs; engaging relevant stakeholders early on and throughout the process to minimize need for redesign; and making pragmatic decisions that balance internal and external validity concerns rather than waiting for perfect solutions.

PMID:
24953520
PMCID:
PMC4609529
DOI:
10.1016/j.amepre.2014.03.007
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center