Table 2.
Specific processes for evaluating each guidance
| SDCEP Activity | TRiaDS Process | TRiaDS Activity | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pre-consultation period (scoping, evidence, and information retrieval, and appraisal, development of first draft of guidance) | Define professional behaviour outcomes | 1. | Collect information from SDCEP guidance development working group and SDCEP Programme Development Team to identify: | |
| a) | the key recommendations and required behaviours (what are the behaviours that dental healthcare professionals need to do to follow best practice). | |||
| b) | if these recommendations can be prioritised (what are the most important behaviours in this guidance)? | |||
| c) | the potential barriers and enablers of translation. | |||
| Diagnostic analysis | 2. | Use the information to decide on behavioural outcome measures to assess best practice. | ||
| 3. | Identify which of these behavioural outcome measures can be assessed using routinely collected data. | |||
| 4. | If routinely-collected data are not available, determine and develop a bespoke data collection tool. | |||
| 5. | Determine the research feasibility (e.g., the costs and benefits relating to associated research requirements, routine or bespoke data collection, intervention, implementation. and evaluation funding). | |||
| Stakeholder consultation period (draft guidance sent to stakeholders (dental healthcare professionals, patients, regulatory and authoritative bodies) for general comments on content, structure, and format of the guidance) | Diagnostic analysis | 1. | Conduct telephone interviews/focus groups to identify salient beliefs regarding barriers/facilitators/advantages/disadvantages relating to each behaviour on the outcome list. A random sample of dental health professionals will be invited to take part. | |
| 2. | Use this information plus stakeholder consultation data to establish: | |||
| a) | possible predictors of behaviour/behaviour change/theoretical domains relevant to this guidance and identify possible theories which might be used to develop a knowledge translation (KT) intervention if needed. | |||
| b) | the degree of variation in practice. | |||
| Pre-publication period (revision, peer review, final amendments) | Decide on the need for and design of KT intervention | 1. | Identify criteria to determine if a translation strategy is necessary in total or for each behavioural outcome measure, e.g., 50% or 95% adherence to guidance. | |
| 2. | Test any bespoke tools for gathering non-routinely collected data. | |||
| Dissemination | Decide on the need for and design of KT intervention | 1. | Use interrupted time series to identify trend and step changes in routinely available or bespoke data (at least 15 months of data: 12 months pre- and 3 months postguidance consultation/launch/impact on tracer conditions). | |
| 2. | Survey random sample using self-report questionnaires for data on impact on salient beliefs? | |||
| 3. | Apply identified criteria and determine if an intervention is required. | |||
| Review | Evaluation | 1. | Follow specific protocol to develop and test a guidance translation intervention if required | |
| 2. | Monitor long term guidance outcomes: | |||
| a) | Develop a universal outcome questionnaire with common and specific questions to each of the published guidance topics. This will be a self-reported tool administered electronically or by post. | |||
| b) | A random sample of dental health professionals will be invited to take part. We will structure the tool for replication within and across guidance topics administered in a block design or universally at an annual or six-month period. An economic analysis will for part of the evaluation of guidance production dissemination and translation. | |||
| 3. | Collect data from steps above and collate with each guidance experience (plus the current literature) to quantify (synthesise) what is known about changing each (set of) behaviours (effectiveness of interventions, the process of change, and the predictors of change). | |||