All workshops take place on August 23, 2023
Tickets can be purchased upon registration for the Congress.
1: Compare intervention evaluation and intervention optimization
2: Develop clearly articulated conceptual model
3: Understand how to select an experimental design from a resource management perspective
4: Understand practical strategies for proposing a factorial experiment in a research proposal
(1) Introduction to MOST with a hypothetical example of reducing viral load in HIV-positive individuals who drink heavily;
(2) Building conceptual models [interactive activity];
(3) Choosing an experimental design using the resource management principle;
(4) Introduction to decision-making [interactive activity]; and
(5) Grantsmanship & discussion
Typically, workshop attendees are behavioural scientists or intervention scientists who wish to design effective, efficient, economical and scalable interventions. The presentation is geared toward postdoctoral scholars, early career scientists, and senior scientists. An advanced graduate student can usually benefit from the workshop as well.
1. Describe best practices for designing and deploying mobile health apps.
2. Develop mobile health apps using the “no-code” app development platform (Pathverse).
3. Discuss mobile app evaluation methods and previous research studies completed using the platform.
2) Discuss how to use the “no-code” app development platform (Pathverse) for designing mobile health apps
3) Develop different types of mobile apps (e.g., patient education apps, adaptive interventions, ecological momentary assessments) using the Pathverse platform
4) Explore best practices for designing and evaluating mobile apps
This workshop is intended for individuals at all levels: students and trainees, early career professionals, and mid-career professionals are all welcome.
(i) Presentation on main concepts and current evidence in the sustainability field;
(ii) Interactive activity “think, pair, share” where participants will:
• Think of an EBI that has ceased delivery and reflect on why they believed it wasn’t sustained
• Pair with other participants to share their insights about the program and what they believe are the top reasons why it wasn’t sustained
• Share with the rest of the group the common reasons for their programs not being sustained;
(iii – part 1) Presentation on theories, frameworks, planning tools and their application in the field of sustainability;
(iii – part 2) Participants will use the EBI (from step ii above) and complete a sustainability planning tool, the Program Sustainability Assessment Tool (PSAT) and score this program. The PSAT will enable participants to assess this program’s current capacity for sustainability, and identify factors that may impact on the program’s long-term delivery. Their responses will identify sustainability strengths and challenges which they will use to guide sustainability action planning for the program. Participants will identify and discuss the lowest scoring domain for their project, determine whether similarities were identified across groups and think of possible solutions of how they may address this issue.
(iv) Summary presentation on how participants can map identified barriers and select appropriate sustainability strategies using existing methods and sustainability taxonomies.
1) Define the reasons and rationales for undertaking a rapid systematic review or living systematic review rather than a traditional systematic review
2) Describe the key methodological decisions that need to be considered when conducting a rapid systematic review
3) Detail the key methodological decisions that need to be considered when conducting a living systematic review
4) Illustrate some of the key challenges (and solutions) when wanting to conduct analyses (e.g., meta-analyses) with data generated from these alternative review methodologies
To list three benefits or challenges to integrating qualitative and quantitative designs in a mixed methods approach
— A concise overview of qualitative (ethnography, grounded theory, phenomenology, and case study approaches) and their intersection with mixed methods research designs.
— The integration of quantitative approaches, particularly from survey research, with mixed methods research designs.
— The 10 steps of mixed methods research
— Publishing and funding mixed methods research
— Additional training programs in mixed methods research
During the workshop, we will discuss the conduct of a mixed methods study of HPV vaccine hesitancy after a mass psychogenic response in Colombia, with data from focus groups and surveys. We will also apply the mixed methods approach to a registry- and focus-group based study of HPV vaccine uptake in the rural (US) midwest.
Attendees will be encouraged to work in small groups, exploring both these examples, as well as their own, with consultation from the workshop leaders.
2: Participants can bring their insights and reflections on specific qualitative data and data problems into a collective process of analysis.
3: Participants will have tested the OYD framework for qualitative analysis and can bring the idea back to their research environments as a way to foster collaborative and creative engagement of qualitative research data.
The workshop gives a brief introduction to qualitative data analysis, raising questions about how we can collaborate on data problems. This includes a more specific introduction to the OYD framework that we will work with.
Following this, we spend two hours in smaller groups working with the OYD format. Each person in the group will present data and a data problem. The group will unfold a collaborative analysis of this in two rounds of reflection and discussion. Participants will be divided into groups of five persons, where everyone gets a chance to get reflections on their data.
Each data problem/ data owner gets 20 minutes and within two hours we have worked our way through the data problems.
The workshop will wrap up with half an hour of shared reflection on the format and learning points from the work, as well as a more general discussion about transparency in qualitative analysis.
Participants should have prior experience with producing qualitative research data. We welcome all types of qualitative methods, data, analytical strategies, and methodological perspectives. Participants must be ready to share a small piece of their own data in anonymized form during the workshop. All participants bring their own qualitative data to discuss in the form of an interview transcript, field notes, photos, etc. The maximum length of the data excerpt is 2 pages. The data should be anonymized and printed out in five copies for group work.
2) Analyze underdeveloped links and possibilities for behavioral medicine field.
3) Synthesize questions/problems/blindspots to address for improved integration.
4) Generate new, integrated own research ideas.
The 3-hour workshop will be organized around the UN sustainable development goals and 4 phases of co-creative activities: 1) initial mapping of links between own research/practice and sustainable development goals (in workgroups, n≈ 5; then quantitatively summarized for whole group); 2) building on initial mapping, analysis of yet underdeveloped links and possibilities (in workgroups, n≈ 5); 3) short presentations of workgroup analyses and unresolved questions (to whole group); and 4) integration, discussion and conclusions (whole group). Briefer variations on this workshop format have previously been tested and appreciated in diverse disciplinary groups at Uppsala University.
The main target group is early career researchers and researcher/practitioners looking to identify or develop possibilities to integrate sustainable development in their work. No particular preparations, preexisting knowledge or experience are expected.