Considering a multisite study? How to take the leap and have a soft landing

Carolyn S Dewa, Janet Durbin, Donald Wasylenki, Joanna Ochocka, Shirley Eastabrook, Katherine M. Boydell, Paula Goering

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

22 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Although most policy makers agree that a fundamental goal of the mental health system is to provide integrated community-based services, there is little empirical evidence with which to plan such a system. Studies in the community mental health literature have not used a standard set of evaluation methods. One way of addressing this gap is through a multisite program evaluation in which multiple sites and programs evaluate the same outcomes using the same instruments and time frame. The proposition of introducing tire same study design in different settings and programs is deceptively straightforward. The difficulty is not in the conceptualization but in the implementation. This article examines the factors that act as implementation barriers, how are they magnified in a multisite study design, and how they can be successfully addressed. In discussing the issue of study design, this article considers processes used to address six major types of barriers to conducting collaborative studies identified by Lancaster or Lancaster's six Cs - contribution, communication, compatibility, consensus, credit, and commitment. A case study approach is used to examine implementation of a multisite community mental health evaluation of services and supports (case management, self-help initiatives, crisis interventions) represented by six independent evaluations of 15 community health programs. A principal finding was that one of the main vehicles to a successful multisite project is participation. It is only through participation that Lancaster's six Cs can be addressed. Key factors in large, geographically dispersed, and diverse groups include the use of advisory committees, explicit criteria and opportunities for participation, reliance on all modes of communication, and valuing informal interactions. The article concludes that whereas modern technology has assisted in making complicated research designs feasible, the operationalization of timeless virtues such as mutual respect and trust, flexibility, and commitment make them successful.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)173-187
Number of pages15
JournalJournal of Community Psychology
Volume30
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2002
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

mental health
Mental Health
evaluation
Communication
Community Mental Health Services
Crisis Intervention
community
participation
Social Welfare
Program Evaluation
Case Management
Advisory Committees
commitment
Administrative Personnel
crisis intervention
communication
operationalization
Consensus
self-help
case management

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Psychology(all)
  • Social Sciences (miscellaneous)

Cite this

Dewa, C. S., Durbin, J., Wasylenki, D., Ochocka, J., Eastabrook, S., Boydell, K. M., & Goering, P. (2002). Considering a multisite study? How to take the leap and have a soft landing. Journal of Community Psychology, 30(2), 173-187. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.10001

Considering a multisite study? How to take the leap and have a soft landing. / Dewa, Carolyn S; Durbin, Janet; Wasylenki, Donald; Ochocka, Joanna; Eastabrook, Shirley; Boydell, Katherine M.; Goering, Paula.

In: Journal of Community Psychology, Vol. 30, No. 2, 03.2002, p. 173-187.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Dewa, CS, Durbin, J, Wasylenki, D, Ochocka, J, Eastabrook, S, Boydell, KM & Goering, P 2002, 'Considering a multisite study? How to take the leap and have a soft landing', Journal of Community Psychology, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 173-187. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.10001
Dewa, Carolyn S ; Durbin, Janet ; Wasylenki, Donald ; Ochocka, Joanna ; Eastabrook, Shirley ; Boydell, Katherine M. ; Goering, Paula. / Considering a multisite study? How to take the leap and have a soft landing. In: Journal of Community Psychology. 2002 ; Vol. 30, No. 2. pp. 173-187.
@article{276313c3afac401aa098357462e424d4,
title = "Considering a multisite study? How to take the leap and have a soft landing",
abstract = "Although most policy makers agree that a fundamental goal of the mental health system is to provide integrated community-based services, there is little empirical evidence with which to plan such a system. Studies in the community mental health literature have not used a standard set of evaluation methods. One way of addressing this gap is through a multisite program evaluation in which multiple sites and programs evaluate the same outcomes using the same instruments and time frame. The proposition of introducing tire same study design in different settings and programs is deceptively straightforward. The difficulty is not in the conceptualization but in the implementation. This article examines the factors that act as implementation barriers, how are they magnified in a multisite study design, and how they can be successfully addressed. In discussing the issue of study design, this article considers processes used to address six major types of barriers to conducting collaborative studies identified by Lancaster or Lancaster's six Cs - contribution, communication, compatibility, consensus, credit, and commitment. A case study approach is used to examine implementation of a multisite community mental health evaluation of services and supports (case management, self-help initiatives, crisis interventions) represented by six independent evaluations of 15 community health programs. A principal finding was that one of the main vehicles to a successful multisite project is participation. It is only through participation that Lancaster's six Cs can be addressed. Key factors in large, geographically dispersed, and diverse groups include the use of advisory committees, explicit criteria and opportunities for participation, reliance on all modes of communication, and valuing informal interactions. The article concludes that whereas modern technology has assisted in making complicated research designs feasible, the operationalization of timeless virtues such as mutual respect and trust, flexibility, and commitment make them successful.",
author = "Dewa, {Carolyn S} and Janet Durbin and Donald Wasylenki and Joanna Ochocka and Shirley Eastabrook and Boydell, {Katherine M.} and Paula Goering",
year = "2002",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1002/jcop.10001",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "30",
pages = "173--187",
journal = "Journal of Community Psychology",
issn = "0090-4392",
publisher = "Wiley-Liss Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Considering a multisite study? How to take the leap and have a soft landing

AU - Dewa, Carolyn S

AU - Durbin, Janet

AU - Wasylenki, Donald

AU - Ochocka, Joanna

AU - Eastabrook, Shirley

AU - Boydell, Katherine M.

AU - Goering, Paula

PY - 2002/3

Y1 - 2002/3

N2 - Although most policy makers agree that a fundamental goal of the mental health system is to provide integrated community-based services, there is little empirical evidence with which to plan such a system. Studies in the community mental health literature have not used a standard set of evaluation methods. One way of addressing this gap is through a multisite program evaluation in which multiple sites and programs evaluate the same outcomes using the same instruments and time frame. The proposition of introducing tire same study design in different settings and programs is deceptively straightforward. The difficulty is not in the conceptualization but in the implementation. This article examines the factors that act as implementation barriers, how are they magnified in a multisite study design, and how they can be successfully addressed. In discussing the issue of study design, this article considers processes used to address six major types of barriers to conducting collaborative studies identified by Lancaster or Lancaster's six Cs - contribution, communication, compatibility, consensus, credit, and commitment. A case study approach is used to examine implementation of a multisite community mental health evaluation of services and supports (case management, self-help initiatives, crisis interventions) represented by six independent evaluations of 15 community health programs. A principal finding was that one of the main vehicles to a successful multisite project is participation. It is only through participation that Lancaster's six Cs can be addressed. Key factors in large, geographically dispersed, and diverse groups include the use of advisory committees, explicit criteria and opportunities for participation, reliance on all modes of communication, and valuing informal interactions. The article concludes that whereas modern technology has assisted in making complicated research designs feasible, the operationalization of timeless virtues such as mutual respect and trust, flexibility, and commitment make them successful.

AB - Although most policy makers agree that a fundamental goal of the mental health system is to provide integrated community-based services, there is little empirical evidence with which to plan such a system. Studies in the community mental health literature have not used a standard set of evaluation methods. One way of addressing this gap is through a multisite program evaluation in which multiple sites and programs evaluate the same outcomes using the same instruments and time frame. The proposition of introducing tire same study design in different settings and programs is deceptively straightforward. The difficulty is not in the conceptualization but in the implementation. This article examines the factors that act as implementation barriers, how are they magnified in a multisite study design, and how they can be successfully addressed. In discussing the issue of study design, this article considers processes used to address six major types of barriers to conducting collaborative studies identified by Lancaster or Lancaster's six Cs - contribution, communication, compatibility, consensus, credit, and commitment. A case study approach is used to examine implementation of a multisite community mental health evaluation of services and supports (case management, self-help initiatives, crisis interventions) represented by six independent evaluations of 15 community health programs. A principal finding was that one of the main vehicles to a successful multisite project is participation. It is only through participation that Lancaster's six Cs can be addressed. Key factors in large, geographically dispersed, and diverse groups include the use of advisory committees, explicit criteria and opportunities for participation, reliance on all modes of communication, and valuing informal interactions. The article concludes that whereas modern technology has assisted in making complicated research designs feasible, the operationalization of timeless virtues such as mutual respect and trust, flexibility, and commitment make them successful.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=23044530889&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=23044530889&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/jcop.10001

DO - 10.1002/jcop.10001

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:23044530889

VL - 30

SP - 173

EP - 187

JO - Journal of Community Psychology

JF - Journal of Community Psychology

SN - 0090-4392

IS - 2

ER -