Developing a common framework for evaluating the implementation of genomic medicine interventions in clinical care: the IGNITE Network's Common Measures Working Group
Lori A Orlando, Nina R Sperber, Corrine Voils, Marshall Nichols, Rachel A Myers, R Ryanne Wu, Tejinder Rakhra-Burris, Kenneth D Levy, Mia Levy, Toni I Pollin, Yue Guan, Carol R Horowitz, Michelle Ramos, Stephen E Kimmel, Caitrin W McDonough, Ebony B Madden, Laura J Damschroder, Lori A Orlando, Nina R Sperber, Corrine Voils, Marshall Nichols, Rachel A Myers, R Ryanne Wu, Tejinder Rakhra-Burris, Kenneth D Levy, Mia Levy, Toni I Pollin, Yue Guan, Carol R Horowitz, Michelle Ramos, Stephen E Kimmel, Caitrin W McDonough, Ebony B Madden, Laura J Damschroder
Abstract
PurposeImplementation research provides a structure for evaluating the clinical integration of genomic medicine interventions. This paper describes the Implementing Genomics in Practice (IGNITE) Network's efforts to promote (i) a broader understanding of genomic medicine implementation research and (ii) the sharing of knowledge generated in the network.MethodsTo facilitate this goal, the IGNITE Network Common Measures Working Group (CMG) members adopted the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to guide its approach to identifying constructs and measures relevant to evaluating genomic medicine as a whole, standardizing data collection across projects, and combining data in a centralized resource for cross-network analyses.ResultsCMG identified 10 high-priority CFIR constructs as important for genomic medicine. Of those, eight did not have standardized measurement instruments. Therefore, we developed four survey tools to address this gap. In addition, we identified seven high-priority constructs related to patients, families, and communities that did not map to CFIR constructs. Both sets of constructs were combined to create a draft genomic medicine implementation model.ConclusionWe developed processes to identify constructs deemed valuable for genomic medicine implementation and codified them in a model. These resources are freely available to facilitate knowledge generation and sharing across the field.
Conflict of interest statement
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
None of the authors have any conflicts of interest as relates to the work presented in this paper.
Figures
References
- Weitzel KW, Alexander M, Bernhardt BA, et al. The IGNITE network: a model for genomic medicine implementation and research. BMC Med Genomics. 2016;9:1.
- Manolio TA, Chisholm RL, Ozenberger B, et al. Implementing genomic medicine in the clinic: the future is here. Genetics in Medicine. 2013;15(4):258–267.
- Chambers DA, Feero W, Khoury MJ. Convergence of implementation science, precision medicine, and the learning health care system: A new model for biomedical research. JAMA. 2016;315(18):1941–1942.
- Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE, Kirsh SR, Alexander JA, Lowery JC. Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implement Sci. 2009;4:50.
- Kirk MA, Kelley C, Yankey N, Birken SA, Abadie B, Damschroder L. A systematic review of the use of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Implementation Science. 2016;11(1):72.
- Larsen KR, Voronovich ZA, Cook PF, Pedro LW. Addicted to constructs: science in reverse? Addiction. 2013;108(9):1532–1533.
- Wacker JG. A definition of theory: research guidelines for different theory-building research methods in operations management. Journal of Operations Management. 1998;16(4):361–385.
- Busija L, Pausenberger E, Haines TP, Haymes S, Buchbinder R, Osborne RH. Adult measures of general health and health-related quality of life: Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36-Item (SF-36) and Short Form 12-Item (SF-12) Health Surveys, Nottingham Health Profile (NHP), Sickness Impact Profile (SIP), Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 6D (SF-6D), Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI3), Quality of Well-Being Scale (QWB), and Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2011;63(Suppl 11):S383–412.
- Voils CI, Maciejewski ML, Hoyle RH, et al. Initial validation of a self-report measure of the extent of and reasons for medication nonadherence. Medical care. 2012;50(12):1013–1019.
- Wallace LS, Rogers ES, Roskos SE, Holiday DB, Weiss BD. BRIEF REPORT: Screening Items to Identify Patients with Limited Health Literacy Skills. Journal of General Internal Medicine. 2006;21(8):874–877.
- Hibbard JH, Stockard J, Mahoney ER, Tusler M. Development of the Patient Activation Measure (PAM): Conceptualizing and Measuring Activation in Patients and Consumers. Health Services Research. 2004;39(4 pt 1):1005–1025.
- Shea CM, Jacobs SR, Esserman DA, Bruce K, Weiner BJ. Organizational readiness for implementing change: a psychometric assessment of a new measure. Implementation Science. 2014;9(1):7.
Source: PubMed