↓ Skip to main content

The Contextualized Technology Adaptation Process (CTAP): Optimizing Health Information Technology to Improve Mental Health Systems

Overview of attention for article published in Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
15 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
56 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
163 Mendeley
Title
The Contextualized Technology Adaptation Process (CTAP): Optimizing Health Information Technology to Improve Mental Health Systems
Published in
Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, February 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10488-015-0637-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aaron R. Lyon, Jessica Knaster Wasse, Kristy Ludwig, Mark Zachry, Eric J. Bruns, Jürgen Unützer, Elizabeth McCauley

Abstract

Health information technologies have become a central fixture in the mental healthcare landscape, but few frameworks exist to guide their adaptation to novel settings. This paper introduces the contextualized technology adaptation process (CTAP) and presents data collected during Phase 1 of its application to measurement feedback system development in school mental health. The CTAP is built on models of human-centered design and implementation science and incorporates repeated mixed methods assessments to guide the design of technologies to ensure high compatibility with a destination setting. CTAP phases include: (1) Contextual evaluation, (2) Evaluation of the unadapted technology, (3) Trialing and evaluation of the adapted technology, (4) Refinement and larger-scale implementation, and (5) Sustainment through ongoing evaluation and system revision. Qualitative findings from school-based practitioner focus groups are presented, which provided information for CTAP Phase 1, contextual evaluation, surrounding education sector clinicians' workflows, types of technologies currently available, and influences on technology use. Discussion focuses on how findings will inform subsequent CTAP phases, as well as their implications for future technology adaptation across content domains and service sectors.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 163 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 159 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 12%
Researcher 18 11%
Student > Master 17 10%
Student > Bachelor 12 7%
Other 35 21%
Unknown 34 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 34 21%
Social Sciences 19 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 10%
Computer Science 12 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 6%
Other 25 15%
Unknown 46 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 May 2017.
All research outputs
#3,670,982
of 25,732,188 outputs
Outputs from Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research
#136
of 723 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51,356
of 370,167 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research
#1
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,732,188 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 723 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 370,167 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.