Cited by 14Health Policy Implementation SciencePsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsClinical practice guidelines implementation

An intervention mapping process to increase evidence-based psychotherapy within a complex healthcare system.

Crowe, Chris, Collie, Claire, Johnson, Clara, Wiltsey Stirman, Shannon·2020·American Psychologist

Abstract

In response to recommendations from the Special Committee on posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), the United States Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration (VHA) chartered a workgroup to identify strategies for improving the reach and fidelity of evidence-based psychotherapies (EBPs) implemented by VHA through clinician training initiatives. The workgroup, which comprised stakeholders in a variety of roles within the VHA, used an Intervention Mapping process, a practical approach to designing change strategies based on theory, evidence, and stakeholder input. High-level recommendations centered around implementation of recent VHA/Department of Defense (VA/DoD) treatment guidelines. In addition to recommended first-line and suggested second-line treatments, the guidelines include measurement-based care and shared decision making around EBPs and their alternatives to ensure that care is goal-oriented and patient-centered. To support increased reach and fidelity, the workgroup made four broad recommendations: (a) enhancing leadership support; (b) alignment of policies, programs, and processes that influence reach of EBPs as recommended in clinical practice guidelines, including implementation support to accompany EBP trainings; (c) use of clinical data to inform decision making at multiple levels, and to provide fidelity support when outcomes are lower than expected or desired; and (d) increasing veteran and stakeholder education and awareness of guideline recommendations and availability of EBPs. These recommendations accompanied a more detailed set of recommended steps for implementation. This article describes the Intervention Mapping process and a summary of resulting workgroup recommendations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/amp0000631

Cites

12 of 12 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

Authors
Crowe, C., Collie, C., Johnson, C., & Wiltsey Stirman, S.
Affiliations
  • United States Department of Veterans Affairs (US)
  • VA Palo Alto Health Care System (US)
Venue
American Psychologist
Published
2020-11
Volume
75
Issue
8
Pages
1116-1129
ISSN
  • 0003-066X (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-990X
OpenAlex
W3107495434
Cited by
14
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1
FWCI
1.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Psychologist (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
Keywords
evidence-based psychotherapy, post-traumatic stress disorder, veterans, Veterans Health Administration, intervention mapping, implementation strategies, clinician training, treatment guidelines, measurement-based care, shared decision-making, leadership support, guideline adherence, stakeholder engagement, patient-centered care
MeSH terms
Implementation Science, Delivery of Health Care, Humans, Psychotherapy, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic, United States, United States Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans, 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