An integrated approach to formulate a value-based software process tailoring framework

Software process tailoring is an approach to customise the existing software development process or model that able to meet the software project’s needs. Software development project is unique and identical from one and another whereby the practices and decision should not be equally treated. Software process tailoring requires knowledge and intuition to make decision such as factors involved in the software project, selection of the suitable software process elements and tailoring operations. Software process tailoring practices focusing more on project characteristics factors and employs ad hoc approach in making the decision. In the absent of value-based factors and systematic method in software process tailoring, subjectivity is embedded in decision making process and the software development project suffers from satisfying the stakeholder. This study presents an integrated approach to formulate a Value-Based Software Process Tailoring Framework (VBSPTF) to overcome this problem. The framework is a combination of value-based factors, MoSCoW rules, Quality Functional Deployment (QFD), Activity-Based Costing (ABC), Priority Map, Value Index and Value Graph. This study perhaps can contribute to the software process tailoring practitioners to be exposed with a systematic method to conduct software process tailoring as well as improving the practices and reducing subjectivity in decision making

Delphi Austria - An Example of Tailoring Foresight to the Needs of a Small Country

The world-wide diffusion and recognition of Technology Foresight suggests that it is of value for quite diverse types of economies and societies. Its merit as an important tool of strategic intelligence for policy-making also in small countries and transition economies depends on a careful tailoring to specific needs. Practice of Foresight is rather diverse also among small countries, but approaches tend to be more selective in scope, have more specific goals, and put greater emphasis on demand aspects than in bigger countries. Austria’s first systematic Foresight programme (completed in 1998) is an example of an innovative approach adapted to the needs of a small country. This contribution shows how Delphi Austria was tailored to a small economy which had undergone a successful catch-up process and how the Foresight process as well as its results have been utilised.Technology Foresight, Delphi method, small country, Austria, innovation, technology policy, implementation

Implementing advance care planning in routine nursing home care : the development of the theory-based ACP+ program

Background While various initiatives have been taken to improve advance care planning in nursing homes, it is difficult to find enough details about interventions to allow comparison, replication and translation into practice. Objectives We report on the development and description of the ACP+ program, a multi-component theory-based program that aims to implement advance care planning into routine nursing home care. We aimed to 1) specify how intervention components can be delivered; 2) evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of the program; 3) describe the final program in a standardized manner. Design To develop and model the intervention, we applied multiple study methods including a literature review, expert discussions and individual and group interviews with nursing home staff and management. We recruited participants through convenience sampling. Setting and participants Management and staff (n = 17) from five nursing homes in Flanders (Belgium), a multidisciplinary expert group and a palliative care nurse-trainer. Methods The work was carried out by means of 1) operationalization of key intervention components identified as part of a previously developed theory on how advance care planning is expected to lead to its desired outcomes in nursing homes into specific activities and materials, through expert discussions and review of existing advance care planning programs; 2) evaluation of feasibility and acceptability of the program through interviews with nursing home management and staff and expert revisions; and 3) standardized description of the final program according to the TIDieR checklist. During step 2, we used thematic analysis. Results The original program with nine key components was expanded to include ten intervention components, 22 activities and 17 materials to support delivery into routine nursing home care. The final ACP+ program includes ongoing training and coaching, management engagement, different roles and responsibilities in organizing advance care planning, conversations, documentation and information transfer, integration of advance care planning into multidisciplinary meetings, auditing, and tailoring to the specific setting. These components are to be implemented stepwise throughout an intervention period. The program involves the entire nursing home workforce. The support of an external trainer decreases as nursing home staff become more autonomous in organizing advance care planning. Conclusions The multicomponent ACP+ program involves residents, family, and the different groups of people working in the nursing home. It is deemed feasible and acceptable by nursing home staff and management. The findings presented in this paper, alongside results of the subsequent randomized controlled cluster trial, can facilitate comparison, replicability and translation of the intervention into practice

Towards a Holistic Approach to Designing Theory-based Mobile Health Interventions

Increasing evidence has shown that theory-based health behavior change interventions are more effective than non-theory-based ones. However, only a few segments of relevant studies were theory-based, especially the studies conducted by non-psychology researchers. On the other hand, many mobile health interventions, even those based on the behavioral theories, may still fail in the absence of a user-centered design process. The gap between behavioral theories and user-centered design increases the difficulty of designing and implementing mobile health interventions. To bridge this gap, we propose a holistic approach to designing theory-based mobile health interventions built on the existing theories and frameworks of three categories: (1) behavioral theories (e.g., the Social Cognitive Theory, the Theory of Planned Behavior, and the Health Action Process Approach), (2) the technological models and frameworks (e.g., the Behavior Change Techniques, the Persuasive System Design and Behavior Change Support System, and the Just-in-Time Adaptive Interventions), and (3) the user-centered systematic approaches (e.g., the CeHRes Roadmap, the Wendel's Approach, and the IDEAS Model). This holistic approach provides researchers a lens to see the whole picture for developing mobile health interventions

Conducting co-creation for public health in low and middle-income countries: a systematic review and key informant perspectives on implementation barriers and facilitators

Background: There has been an increase in the use of co-creation for public health because of its claimed potential to increase an intervention’s impact, spark change and co-create knowledge. Still, little is reported on its use in low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs). This study offers a comprehensive overview of co-creation used in public-health-related interventions, including the interventions’ characteristics, and reported implementation barriers and facilitators. Methods: We conducted a systematic review within the Scopus and PubMed databases, a Google Scholar search, and a manual search in two grey literature databases related to participatory research. We further conducted eight interviews with first authors, randomly selected from included studies, to validate and enrich the systematic review findings. Results: Through our review, we identified a total of twenty-two studies conducted in twenty-four LMIC countries. Majority of the interventions were designed directly within the LMIC setting. Aside from one, all studies were published between 2019 and 2023. Most studies adopted a co-creation approach, while some reported on the use of co-production, co-design, and co-development, combined either with community-based participatory research, participatory action research or citizen science. Among the most reported implementation barriers, we found the challenge of understanding and accounting for systemic conditions, such as the individual’s socioeconomic status and concerns related to funding constraints and length of the process. Several studies described the importance of creating a safe space, relying on local resources, and involving existing stakeholders in the process from the development stage throughout, including future and potential implementors. High relevance was also given to the performance of a contextual and/or needs assessment and careful tailoring of strategies and methods. Conclusion: This study provides a systematic overview of previously conducted studies and of reported implementation barriers and facilitators. It identifies implementation barriers such as the setting’s systemic conditions, the socioeconomic status and funding constrains along with facilitators such as the involvement of local stakeholders and future implementors throughout, the tailoring of the process to the population of interest and participants and contextual assessment. By incorporating review and interview findings, the study aims to provide practical insights and recommendations for guiding future research and policy.</p