Table 2 Summary of similarities and differences of contextual factors identified across countries
|
Australia N = 13 |
Brazil N = 9 |
China N = 16 |
United States N = 12 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The most commonly cited channels for obtaining information on EBCDP interventions | ||||
| Academic journals | x | x | ||
| Conferences | x | x | ||
| Networks | x | x | x | |
| Professional associations | x | x | x | |
| The most useful channel for accessing EBCDP interventions was their peers | x | x | x | x |
| Reported only a few programmatic areas in which evidence-based repositories were being used within their organizations of employment | x | x | x | x |
| Perceived personal-level barriers to the implementation of EBCDP interventions | ||||
| Lack of time | x | x | x | |
| Heavy workload | x | x | ||
| Lack of expertise with developing and implementing EBCDP interventions | x | x | ||
| Optimism and versatility in overcoming barriers | x | |||
| Perceived organizational-level barriers to the implementation of EBCDP interventions | ||||
| Unsupportive workplace cultures | x | x | x | x |
| Perceived lack of support for EBCDP from the organization’s leadership | x | |||
| Lack of communication across various groups | x | x | ||
| Lack of a workplace policy, mechanism, or incentive to promote and/or keep staff members accountable for making evidence-based decisions in their work | x | x | ||
| Presence of workplace policies that limit personal authority to select the best interventions or to make other changes necessary to incorporate EBCDP | x | x | ||
| Inadequate number of staff to implement EBCDP interventions | x | x | x | |
| Lack of access to evidence | x | x | ||
| Lack of evidence relevant to rural communities | x | |||
| Facilitators to implementing evidence-based interventions | x | |||
| Funding agencies that require EBCDP interventions | ||||
| Having an education/degree | x | x | x | |
| Partnerships/support from others | x | x | x | x |