Where do psychologists turn to inform clinical decisions? Audience segmentation to guide dissemination strategies
Background Audience segmentation is an analysis technique that can identify meaningful subgroups within a population to inform the tailoring of dissemination strategies. We have conducted an empirical clustering audience segmentation study of licensed psychologists using survey data about the source...
Saved in:
Published in | Implementation research and practice Vol. 4; p. 26334895231185376 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
London, England
SAGE Publications
01.01.2023
SAGE Publishing |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | Background
Audience segmentation is an analysis technique that can identify meaningful subgroups within a population to inform the tailoring of dissemination strategies. We have conducted an empirical clustering audience segmentation study of licensed psychologists using survey data about the sources of knowledge they report most often consulting to guide their clinical decision-making. We identify meaningful subgroups within the population and inform the tailoring of dissemination strategies for evidence-based practice (EBP) materials.
Method
Data come from a 2018–2019 web-based survey of licensed psychologists who were members of the American Psychological Association (APA; N = 518, response rate = 29.8%). Ten dichotomous variables assessed sources that psychologists regularly consult to inform clinical decision-making (e.g., colleagues, academic literature, and practice guidelines). We used latent class analysis to identify segments of psychologists who turn to similar sources and named each segment based on the segment's most salient characteristics.
Results
Four audience segments were identified: the No-guidelines (45% of psychologists), Research-driven (16%), Thirsty-for-knowledge (9%), and No-reviews (30%). The four segments differed not only in their preferred sources of knowledge, but also in the types of evidence-based posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) treatments they provide, their awareness and usage intention of the APA PTSD clinical practice guideline, and attitudes toward clinical practice guidelines.
Conclusion
The results demonstrate that licensed psychologists are heterogeneous in terms of their knowledge-seeking behaviors and preferences for knowledge sources. The distinctive characteristics of these segments could guide the tailoring of dissemination materials and strategies to subsequently enhance the implementation of EBP among psychologists.
Plain Language Summary
Audience segmentation is a dissemination strategy that categorizes a group of intended users or audience into meaningful subgroups based on their beliefs, behaviors, and/or other characteristics. Like many other scientific or medical fields, clinical psychology also struggles to use clinically tested psychological treatments (or EBPs) in everyday practice due to practical challenges. To help address such barriers, professional organizations like the American Psychological Association (APA) publish clinical practice guidelines that practitioners can use to learn more about EBPs. However, even these clinical practice guidelines are not often used, so this study employed the audience segmentation analysis to better understand psychologists’ diverse attitudes, behaviors, and preferences regarding clinical practice guidelines and other clinical information sources. Our study found four distinct subgroups within approximately 600 APA-registered psychologists based on their preferred source of knowledge: the no-guidelines (45% of psychologists), research-driven (16%), thirsty-for-knowledge (9%), and no-reviews (30%). Each subgroup also varied in the types of evidence-based treatments they provide, as well as their awareness, willingness to use, and attitudes toward clinical practice guidelines. This result shows that licensed psychologists are not a uniform group and that dissemination strategies should be adjusted to each subgroup's characteristics to maximize the effort to increase the use of EBPs among psychologists. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 |
ISSN: | 2633-4895 2633-4895 |
DOI: | 10.1177/26334895231185376 |