« Back to Assessment Instruments
Qualitative/Quantitative:
Type of Instrument:
Number of Items:
21Subscale Information:
Resistance to implement policies (5)
Societal benefits (4)
Patient benefits (5)
Personal benefits (7)Language Availability:
Brief Description:
The Diagnosis Related Group (DRG) Policy Survey was used to explore the willingness of professionals to implement a new public policy.Citing Literature - Development/Original:
Tummers, L. G., & Van de Walle, S. (2012). Explaining health care professionals' resistance to implement Diagnosis Related Groups: (No) benefits for society, patients and professionals. Health policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 108(2-3), 158–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2012.08.024.PMID: 22995768.
Citing Literature - Empirical Use/Application:
Tummers, L., & Bekkers, V. (2014). Policy implementation, street-level bureaucracy, and the importance of discretion. Public Management Review, 16(4), 527-547. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2013.841978.Website:
Not FoundAttachments:
Version:
Not FoundRelated Instrument:
Not Found
Diagnosis Related Group (DRG) Policy Survey
Qualitative/Quantitative:
The assessment instrument uses quantitative and/or qualitative data
- Qualitative
Type of Instrument:
The type of the assessment instrument
- Survey
Number of Items:
Number of items in the assessment instrument
21Subscale Information:
Names of each of the subscales and the number of items for each of the subscales
Resistance to implement policies (5)Societal benefits (4)
Patient benefits (5)
Personal benefits (7)
Language Availability:
Language(s) in which the assessment instrument is available
- English
Brief Description:
Brief summary description of assessment instrument
The Diagnosis Related Group (DRG) Policy Survey was used to explore the willingness of professionals to implement a new public policy.Citing Literature - Development/Original:
Reference for publication describing the development of the assessment instrument
Tummers, L. G., & Van de Walle, S. (2012). Explaining health care professionals' resistance to implement Diagnosis Related Groups: (No) benefits for society, patients and professionals. Health policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 108(2-3), 158–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2012.08.024.PMID: 22995768.Citing Literature - Empirical Use/Application:
Reference for publications on the application of the assessment instrument
Tummers, L., & Bekkers, V. (2014). Policy implementation, street-level bureaucracy, and the importance of discretion. Public Management Review, 16(4), 527-547. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2013.841978.Website:
Website providing access to and/or describing the assessment instrument
Not FoundAttachments:
Related files uploaded (instrument if directly available) including descriptions for each
Version:
Number/name of the most recent version of the assessment instrument
Not FoundRelated Instrument:
Indicate if assessment instrument is related to another instrument in the repository.
Not FoundImplementation Science Considerations
- Active Implementation Framework
- Availability, Responsiveness & Continuity (ARC): An Organizational & Community Intervention Model
- Blueprint for Dissemination
- Canadian Institutes of Health Research Knowledge Translation within the Research Cycle Model or Knowledge Action Model
- Choosing Wisely Deimplementation Framework
- Conceptual Framework For The Comparative Analysis of Policy Change
- Conceptual Model of Implementation Research
- Conceptualizing Dissemination Research and Activity: Canadian Heart Health Initiative
- Conduct and Utilization of Research in Nursing (CURN)
- Critical Realism & the Arts Research Utilization Model (CRARIUM)
- Davis' Pathman-PRECEED Model
- Designing and evaluating interventions to eliminate racial and ethnic disparities in health care
- Dissemination and Implementation Framework for an Early Childhood Obesity Prevention Program
- Dissemination of Evidence-based Interventions to Prevent Obesity
- Dynamic Sustainability Framework
- EQ-DI Framework
- Evidence Integration Triangle
- Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) model (Conceptual Model of Evidence-based Practice Implementation in Public Service Sectors)
- Facilitating Adoption of Best Practices (FAB) Model
- Framework for Analyzing Adoption of Complex Health Innovations
- Framework for Dissemination of Evidence-Based Policy
- Framework for Enhancing the Value of Research for Dissemination and Implementation
- Framework for Spread
- Framework for Translating Evidence into Action
- Framework for the Dissemination & Utilization of Research for Health-Care Policy & Practice
- Framework for the Transfer of Patient Safety Research into Practice
- Framework of Dissemination in Health Services Intervention Research
- Greenhalgh Diffusion of Innovations in Service Organizations
- Health Equity Implementation Framework
- Implementation Effectiveness Model
- Intervention Mapping
- Iowa Model of Evidence-Based Practice
- Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice Model and Guidelines
- Kingdon's Multiple-Streams Framework
- Knowledge Exchange Framework
- Model for Improving the Dissemination of Nursing Research
- Model for Predictors of Adoption
- Organizational Theory of Innovation Implementation
- OutPatient Treatment in Ontario Services (OPTIONS) Model
- Pathways to Evidence Informed Policy
- Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM)
- Proctor's Implementation Outcomes
- Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS)
- RE-AIM 1.0 Framework
- RE-AIM 2.0/Contextually Expanded RE-AIM
- Replicating Effective Programs Framework
- Transcreation Framework for Community-engaged Behavioral Interventions to Reduce Health Disparities
- Acceptability
- Adoption
- Use evaluative and iterative strategies
- Pre-Implementation
Constructs Assessed:
Constructs assessed by the assessment instrument (linked to constructs included in the D&I models webtool)Theories, Models, Frameworks Assessed:
The D&I TMFs relevant for the assesment instrument based on constructs assessedImplementation Outcomes:
The relevance of the assessment instrument to various implementation outcomesImplementation Strategies:
The implementation strategy/ies evaluated by the assessment instrumentPhase of Implementation Process:
Phase of implementation process when the assessment instrument can be used
Intended Focus
- System
- Researcher/Evaluator
- Clinician
- Administrator
- Public Health Practitioner
- Clinical Outpatient
- Clinical Inpatient
- Residential Care
- Public Health Agency
- Public (Laws, Regulations)
- Healthcare Financing/Reimbursement
- Clinical Practice
Levels of Data Collection:
The level(s) from which the assessment instrument collects dataIntended Priority Population:
Intended priority population from whom data are collected using the assessment instrumentIntended Priority Setting:
Intended priority setting in which the assessment instrument is usedPolicy:
Assessment instrument is relevant to policyEquity Focus:
Not Found
Psychometric Properties
Scoring:
YesThe assessment instrument produces a composite scoreNorms:
Not FoundMeasures of central tendency and distribution for the total score are based on small, medium, large sample sizeResponsiveness:
Not FoundThe ability of the assessment instrument to detect change over time (i.e., sensitivity to change or intervention effects).Validity:
Not FoundThe extent to which an instrument measures what it is intended to measure accurately.Reliability:
Not FoundThe extent to which results are consistent results over time, across raters, across settings, or across items intended to measure the same thing.Factor Analysis:
YesA statistical method that uses the correlation between observed variables to identify common factors.
Pragmatic Properties
- Medium: Asyncronous collection of data
Time to Administer:
Not FoundThe amount of time required to complete the assessment instrumentSecondary Data:
Not FoundCost:
Not FoundCost associated with access to assessment instrument (Some insturments might require login.)Literacy:
YesReadability of the items reported on.Interpretation:
Not FoundExpertise needed for interpretation of data is reported.Training:
Not FoundExpertise needed to use the assessment instrument is reportedResources Required to Administer:
Not FoundResources needed to administer the assessment instrument (FTE for data collector, equipment, etc.)User Guidance:
Not FoundGuides are provided to support administration of assessment instrument/data collection, and/or analysis of data from the assessment instrument, and/or interpretation of data, and/or action/decision on how to use dataObtrusiveness:
Degree of intrusion the participants will experience because of the data collection when using the assessment instrument (e.g., assessment instruments that rely on use of secondary data or automated data will be less obtrusive)Interactivity:
Not FoundData collection and/or result generation involves interactive components.
Comments
There are no reviews yet. Be the first one to write one.