CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 33Qualitative Comparative Analysis ResearchHealth Policy Implementation ScienceEvaluation and Performance Assessment

Qualitative Comparative Analysis: A Mixed-Method Tool for Complex Implementation Questions

Hill, Laura G., Cooper, Brittany Rhoades, Parker, Louise A.·2019·The Journal of Primary Prevention
DOI 10.1007/s10935-019-00536-5
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The translation and scale-up of evidence-based programs require new methods to guide implementation decisions across varying contexts. As programs are translated to real-world settings, variability is introduced. Some program components may have minor roles to play in producing positive outcomes, and some may have major roles, but only if adapted to meet different contextual demands. While some sources of variability are likely to improve program outcomes, we currently lack methods that allow us to determine the critical components or combinations of components that serve as causal pathways to a desired outcome and then to advise practitioners accordingly. In this paper, we introduce a promising tool for this purpose and illustrate its use in a translational research context. Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) is often used to examine causality in situations that have complex, multiply-determined outcomes. The basic premise of QCA is that different sets of causal conditions, or causal pathways, may lead to a single outcome (the principle of equifinality). We applied QCA to a selection of the highest- and lowest-performing programs from a multi-year two-state dissemination of The Strengthening Families Program for Parents and Adolescents 10-14 to determine which components or combinations of components at the implementation, program delivery, and participant levels produced desired participant outcomes. In particular, we examined which components were necessary (i.e., in the absence of these factors, the outcome didnot occur), and which were sufficient (i.e., in the presence of these factors, the outcome always occurred). Results demonstrated that certain conditions were necessary for program success. In addition, given those necessary conditions, there were two sets of conditions sufficient to produce success, regardless of the presence or absence of any of the others. QCA, not previously used in prevention science research, helps to illuminate causal pathways, leading to concrete, evidence-based implementation decisions that facilitate generalization and scale-up.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10935-019-00536-5

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Hill, L. G., Cooper, B. R., & Parker, L. A.
Affiliations
Washington State University (US)
Corresponding author
Hill, Laura G.
ORCID
Venue
The Journal of Primary Prevention
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2019-01-22
Volume
40
Issue
1
Pages
69-87
ISSN
  • 0278-095X (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-6547
DOI
10.1007/s10935-019-00536-5
OpenAlex
W2913090087
Cited by
33
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3
FWCI
5.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • The Journal of Primary Prevention (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Qualitative Comparative Analysis Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Evaluation and Performance Assessment
Keywords
qualitative comparative analysis, program implementation, evidence-based programs, scale-up, causal pathways, equifinality, necessary and sufficient conditions, family-based prevention, program components, prevention science
MeSH terms
Implementation Science, Adolescent, Female, Humans, Male, Parent-Child Relations, Research Design, United States, Qualitative Research, Evidence-Based Practice

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review