Dataset Information

How many key informants are enough? Analysing the validity of the community readiness assessment.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Communities are important settings for health promotion and prevention. The community readiness assessment offers a structured approach to assess resources and opportunities to tackle a health problem within a community. The assessment relies on semi-structured interviews with key informants from the communities. A number of 4-6 key informant interviews are recommended in the literature. However, it is unclear whether this is sufficient to obtain a valid representation of the respective community. This study analysed whether increasing the number of key informants from 4-6 to 12-15 alters the results of the community readiness assessment.

Results

A total of 55 community readiness interviews were carried out in 4 communities. Overall, the community readiness scores showed little variation after having interviewed 10 key informants in a community. However, even after completing 10 interviews in a community, key informants were still able to identify up to 6 new information items regarding community efforts for physical activity promotion among the elderly, contact and communication channel for informing or approaching the target group, or barriers to participation.

SUBMITTER: Muellmann S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7941941 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

How many key informants are enough? Analysing the validity of the community readiness assessment.

Muellmann Saskia S Brand Tilman T Jürgens Dorothee D Gansefort Dirk D Zeeb Hajo H

BMC research notes 20210309 1

<h4>Objective</h4>Communities are important settings for health promotion and prevention. The community readiness assessment offers a structured approach to assess resources and opportunities to tackle a health problem within a community. The assessment relies on semi-structured interviews with key informants from the communities. A number of 4-6 key informant interviews are recommended in the literature. However, it is unclear whether this is sufficient to obtain a valid representation of the r ...[more]

PMID: 33750436

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPrimary care is integral to the health system and population health. Primary care research is still in development and most academic departments lack effective research investments. High impact primary care research programs are needed to advance the field to ensure a robust primary care system for the future. The project objective was to understand key informants' views of structures, functions, and processes required to create a high impact research program in an academic primary care department.MethodsA descriptive qualitative project with key informants from research programs in primary care. Participants included international research leaders in primary care (n = 10), department of family and community researchers (n = 37) and staff (n = 9) in an academic primary care department, other university leaders (n = 3) and members of the departmental executive leadership team (1 department; 25 members). Semi-structured interviews (n = 27), and focus groups (n = 6) were audio recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using thematic analysis. We used a socioecological framework which described micro, meso, macro levels of influence.ResultsAt the micro level despite barriers with respect to funding, protected time and lack of formal mentorship, personal motivation was a key factor. At the meso level, the organizational structure that promoted collaboration and a sense of connection emerged as a key factor. Specifically research leaders identified a research faculty development pipeline based on equity, diversity, inclusion, indigeneity, and accessibility principles with thematic areas of focus as key enablers. Lastly, at the macro level, an overarching culture and policies that promoted funding and primary care research was associated with high impact programs.ConclusionThe alignment/complementarity of micro, meso, and macro level factors influenced the creation of a high impact research department in primary care. High impact research in primary care is facilitated by the development of researchers through formalized and structured mentorship/sponsorship and a department culture that promote primary care research.

Project description:BACKGROUND:This article reports on the development of a systematic approach to assess for community readiness prior to implementation of a behavioural intervention for childhood obesity. Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), we developed research tools to evaluate local community centres' organisational readiness and their capacity to implement the intervention. METHODS:Four community Parks and Recreation centres from different states expressed interest in piloting an approach for dissemination and implementation of an evidence-based obesity prevention program for families with young children (Healthier Families). We conducted a mixed methods pre-implementation evaluation using the CFIR to evaluate the alignment of organisational priorities with the Healthier Families programme. Written surveys assessed organisational readiness for change amongst organisational leaders, recreation programmers, and staff (N = 25). Key informant interviews were conducted among staff to assess organisational readiness and with community members to assess community readiness (N = 64). Surveys were analysed with univariate statistics. Interviews were transcribed, coded and analysed using inductive and deductive methods of analysis. RESULTS:Mixed-methods analysis led to the identification of three key domains on which to assess the organisational readiness to adopt a childhood obesity intervention, namely the physical infrastructure, the knowledge infrastructure, and the social infrastructure. The most critical measure of compatibility was the social infrastructure, since obstacles in the knowledge and physical infrastructures could be overcome by the strength of social resources, including the staff's ingenuity and commitment to a healthier community. This approach guided an assessment of organisational readiness prior to community organisations adopting and preparing to disseminate an obesity prevention community-based program in a wide-range of social and environmental contexts. CONCLUSIONS:Using a comprehensive pre-implementation assessment of the knowledge, physical and social infrastructures in a community is an essential step in effective dissemination for community-based behavioural interventions. Our research found that, when evaluating readiness and alignment, a responsive social infrastructure could provide the capacity to overcome potential barriers to implementation in either the knowledge or physical infrastructures.

Dataset Information

How many key informants are enough? Analysing the validity of the community readiness assessment.

Objective

Results

Publications

How many key informants are enough? Analysing the validity of the community readiness assessment.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets