« Back to Assessment Instruments
Qualitative/Quantitative:
Type of Instrument:
Number of Items:
32Subscale Information:
EP1. Focus on community perspectives and determinants of health (4)
EP2. Partner input is vital (4)
EP3. Partnership sustainability to meet goals and objectives (5)
EP4. Foster co-learning, capacity building, and co-benefit for all partners (4)
EP5. Build on strengths and resources within the community or patient population (3)
EP6. Facilitate collaborative, equitable partnerships (4)
EP7. Involve all partners in the dissemination process (3)
EP8. Build and maintain trust in the partnership (5)Language Availability:
Brief Description:
The Research Engagement Survey Tool (REST) is a way to measure the level of partner involvement in a research study. It places the level of partner involvement in one of five categories, from least to most involved: (1) outreach and education, (2) consultation, (3) cooperation, (4) collaboration, or (5) partnership. Researchers can use the REST to find out how involved partners are in a study and compare their level of involvement between studies or within a study over time.Website:
Citing Literature - Development/Original:
Goodman, M. S., Ackermann, N., Haskell-Craig, Z., Jackson, S., Bowen, D. J., & Sanders Thompson, V. L. (2022). Construct validation of the Research Engagement Survey Tool (REST). Research involvement and engagement, 8(1), 26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40900-022-00360-y. PMID: 35710531 PMCID: PMC9204858.
Goodman, M. S., Ackermann, N., Bowen, D. J., & Thompson, V. (2019). Content validation of a quantitative stakeholder engagement measure. Journal of community psychology, 47(8), 1937–1951. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.22239. PMID: 31475370 PMCID: PMC7893513.Citing Literature - Empirical Use/Application:
Rabin, B. A., Cain, K. L., Salgin, L., Watson, P. L., Jr, Oswald, W., Kaiser, B. N., Ayers, L., Yi, C., Alegre, A., Ni, J., Reyes, A., Yu, K. E., Broyles, S. L., Tukey, R., Laurent, L. C., & Stadnick, N. A. (2023). Using ethnographic approaches to document, evaluate, and facilitate virtual community-engaged implementation research. BMC public health, 23(1), 409. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-023-15299-2. PMID: 36855118 PMCID: PMC9974043.
Hoke, A. M., Rosen, P., Pileggi, F., Molinari, A., & Sekhar, D. L. (2023). Evaluation of a stakeholder advisory board for an adolescent mental health randomized clinical trial. Research involvement and engagement, 9(1), 17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40900-023-00425-6. PMID: 36978148 PMCID: PMC10044104.Version:
Final
Research Engagement Survey Tool (REST)
Qualitative/Quantitative:
The assessment instrument uses quantitative and/or qualitative data
The assessment instrument uses quantitative and/or qualitative data
- Quantitative
Type of Instrument:
The type of the assessment instrument
The type of the assessment instrument
- Survey
Number of Items:
Number of items in the assessment instrument
32
Number of items in the assessment instrument
Subscale Information:
Names of each of the subscales and the number of items for each of the subscales
EP1. Focus on community perspectives and determinants of health (4)
Names of each of the subscales and the number of items for each of the subscales
EP2. Partner input is vital (4)
EP3. Partnership sustainability to meet goals and objectives (5)
EP4. Foster co-learning, capacity building, and co-benefit for all partners (4)
EP5. Build on strengths and resources within the community or patient population (3)
EP6. Facilitate collaborative, equitable partnerships (4)
EP7. Involve all partners in the dissemination process (3)
EP8. Build and maintain trust in the partnership (5)
Language Availability:
Language(s) in which the assessment instrument is available
Language(s) in which the assessment instrument is available
- English
Brief Description:
Brief summary description of assessment instrument
The Research Engagement Survey Tool (REST) is a way to measure the level of partner involvement in a research study. It places the level of partner involvement in one of five categories, from least to most involved: (1) outreach and education, (2) consultation, (3) cooperation, (4) collaboration, or (5) partnership. Researchers can use the REST to find out how involved partners are in a study and compare their level of involvement between studies or within a study over time.
Brief summary description of assessment instrument
Website:
Website providing access to and/or describing the assessment instrument
Website providing access to and/or describing the assessment instrument
Instrument and/or related documentation:
Citing Literature - Development/Original:
Reference for publication describing the development of the assessment instrument
Goodman, M. S., Ackermann, N., Haskell-Craig, Z., Jackson, S., Bowen, D. J., & Sanders Thompson, V. L. (2022). Construct validation of the Research Engagement Survey Tool (REST). Research involvement and engagement, 8(1), 26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40900-022-00360-y. PMID: 35710531 PMCID: PMC9204858.
Reference for publication describing the development of the assessment instrument
Goodman, M. S., Ackermann, N., Bowen, D. J., & Thompson, V. (2019). Content validation of a quantitative stakeholder engagement measure. Journal of community psychology, 47(8), 1937–1951. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.22239. PMID: 31475370 PMCID: PMC7893513.
Citing Literature - Empirical Use/Application:
Reference for publications on the application of the assessment instrument
Rabin, B. A., Cain, K. L., Salgin, L., Watson, P. L., Jr, Oswald, W., Kaiser, B. N., Ayers, L., Yi, C., Alegre, A., Ni, J., Reyes, A., Yu, K. E., Broyles, S. L., Tukey, R., Laurent, L. C., & Stadnick, N. A. (2023). Using ethnographic approaches to document, evaluate, and facilitate virtual community-engaged implementation research. BMC public health, 23(1), 409. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-023-15299-2. PMID: 36855118 PMCID: PMC9974043.
Reference for publications on the application of the assessment instrument
Hoke, A. M., Rosen, P., Pileggi, F., Molinari, A., & Sekhar, D. L. (2023). Evaluation of a stakeholder advisory board for an adolescent mental health randomized clinical trial. Research involvement and engagement, 9(1), 17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40900-023-00425-6. PMID: 36978148 PMCID: PMC10044104.
Version:
Number/name of the most recent version of the assessment instrument
Final
Number/name of the most recent version of the assessment instrument
Related Instruments:
Not FoundImplementation Science Considerations
- Active Implementation Framework
- Advancing health disparities research within the health care system
- Availability, Responsiveness & Continuity (ARC): An Organizational & Community Intervention Model
- Blueprint for Dissemination
- Caledonian Practice Development Model
- Choosing Wisely Deimplementation Framework
- Community Based Participatory Research (CBPR)
- Conceptual Framework For The Comparative Analysis of Policy Change
- Conceptual Model of Knowledge Utilization
- Conceptualizing Dissemination Research and Activity: Canadian Heart Health Initiative
- Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research
- Davis' Pathman-PRECEED Model
- Dissemination and Implementation Framework for an Early Childhood Obesity Prevention Program
- Dynamic Sustainability Framework
- EMTReK - Evidence-based Model for the Transfer and Exchange of Research Knowledge
- EQ-DI Framework
- Effective Dissemination Strategies
- Evidence Integration Triangle
- Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) model (Conceptual Model of Evidence-based Practice Implementation in Public Service Sectors)
- Framework for Dissemination of Evidence-Based Policy
- Framework for Enhancing the Value of Research for Dissemination and Implementation
- Framework for Spread
- 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
- Health Promotion Research Center Framework
- Health Promotion Technology Transfer Process
- Interacting Elements of Integrating Science, Policy, and Practice
- Interactive Systems Framework
- Intervention Mapping
- Kingdon's Multiple-Streams Framework
- Knowledge Exchange Framework
- Knowledge Transfer and Exchange
- Linking Systems Framework
- Model for Improving the Dissemination of Nursing Research
- Model for Locally Based Research Transfer Development
- Model for Predictors of Adoption
- Normalization Process Theory
- Ottawa Model of Research Use
- OutPatient Treatment in Ontario Services (OPTIONS) Model
- Pathways to Evidence Informed Policy
- Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM)
- Precede-Proceed Model
- Proctor's Implementation Outcomes
- Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS)
- Pronovost's 4E's Process Theory
- Push-Pull Capacity Model
- RAND Model of Persuasive Communication and Diffusion of Medical Innovation
- RE-AIM 1.0 Framework
- Real-World Dissemination
- Research Development Dissemination and Utilization Framework
- Research Knowledge Infrastructure
- Six-Step Framework for International Physical Activity Dissemination
- Streams of Policy Process
- Technology Transfer Model
- Theoretical Domains Framework
- Transcreation Framework for Community-engaged Behavioral Interventions to Reduce Health Disparities
- Translational Framework for Public Health Research
- Translational Research Framework to Address Health Disparities
- US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI)
- Utilization-Focused Surveillance Framework
- conNECT Framework
- Develop stakeholder interrelationships
- Pre-Implementation
- Implementation
- Sustainment
Constructs Assessed:
Constructs assessed by the assessment instrument (linked to constructs included in the D&I models webtool)
Theories, Models, Frameworks Relevant:
Implementation Outcomes:
Not Found
The relevance of the assessment instrument to various implementation outcomes
Implementation Strategies:
The implementation strategy/ies evaluated by the assessment instrument
Phase of Implementation Process:
Phase of implementation process when the assessment instrument can be used
Intended Focus
- Individual (Patient, Community Member)
- Implementer
- Organizational
- Community
- System
- Community Members/Patients
- Researcher/Evaluator
- Clinician
- Administrator
- Public Health Practitioner
- Clinical Outpatient
- Clinical Inpatient
- Residential Care
- Community Organization
- Public Health Agency
Levels of Data Collection:
The level(s) from which the assessment instrument collects data
Intended Priority Population:
Intended priority population from whom data are collected using the assessment instrument
Intended Priority Setting:
Intended priority setting in which the assessment instrument is used
Policy:
Not Found
Assessment instrument is relevant to policy
Equity Relevant:
Yes
Assessment instrument includes at least one equity-focused component
Psychometric Properties
- Unspecified Validity
Scoring:
Yes
The assessment instrument produces a composite score
Norms:
Not Found
Measures of central tendency and distribution for the total score are based on small, medium, large sample size
Responsiveness:
Not Found
The ability of the assessment instrument to detect change over time (i.e., sensitivity to change or intervention effects).
Validity:
The extent to which an instrument measures what it is intended to measure accurately.
Reliability:
Not Found
The extent to which results are consistent results over time, across raters, across settings, or across items intended to measure the same thing.
Factor Analysis:
Not Found
A statistical method that uses the correlation between observed variables to identify common factors.
Pragmatic Properties
- Guidance to Administer
- Guidance to Analyze
- Guidance to Interpret
- Medium: Asyncronous collection of data
- Generative Outcome
Time to Administer:
Not Found
The amount of time required to complete the assessment instrument
Secondary Data:
Not FoundCost:
Free
Cost associated with access to assessment instrument (Some insturments might require login.)
Literacy:
Yes
Readability of the items reported on.
Interpretation:
No
Expertise needed for interpretation of data is reported.
Training:
No
Expertise needed to use the assessment instrument is reported
Resources Required to Administer:
None/Low
Resources needed to administer the assessment instrument (FTE for data collector, equipment, etc.)
User Guidance:
Guides 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 data
Obtrusiveness:
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:
Data collection and/or result generation involves interactive components.
Comments
There are no reviews yet. Be the first one to write one.