Ilana Eshriqui is Researcher at the Albert Einstein Center for Studies, Research and Practices in Primary health Care (CEPPAR) of the Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, Sao Paulo Brazil. Ilana is graduated in Nutrition at Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ, 2014), with master’s degree in human nutrition (UFRJ, 2017) and PhD in Sciences at School of Public Health of University of Sao Paulo (USP, 2020), with a period as visitor researcher at the Folkhälsan Research Center in Helsinki. She has expertise in Public Health and Nutritional Epidemiology, with focus in practice-based research and implementation science.
The SMAPS is developed in three Brazilian states aiming to support mental health care in Primary Health Care (PHC), using the Health Care Planning method (HCP)  and mhgap training as central implementation strategies . This work aims to present the process to prepare qualitative data collection scripts used to interview multiple levels of SMAPS stakeholders in an implementation assessment research.
The value of the collected data depends on the strength of the interview questions to capture meanings and experiences . Thus, scripts to different levels of stakeholders were constructed through a collaboration between researchers and SMAPS proponents, considering the potential of each question to inform implementation outcomes  and determinants according to Consolidated Framework of Implementation Research (CFIR) .
Scripts were constructed considering four levels of SMAPS stakeholders, who perform different roles in state and municipality government levels (Figure 1). When asked to different stakeholder levels, the same question shows potential to inform different implementation outcomes. However, questions for Innovation delivers and receivers show potential to capture more implementation outcomes then for high and mid-leaders’ levels. All questions show potential to inform the same CFIR determinants independently of stakeholder level.
Beyond being useful to guide research analysis, implementation outcomes and CFIR are useful to construct implementation research scripts and to training interviewers.
1- Evangelista MJO, Guimarães AMDN, Dourado EMR, Vale FLBD, Lins MZS, Matos MAB, Silva RBMDPM, Schwartz SA. Planning and building Health Care Networks in Brazil’s Federal District. Cien Saude Colet. 2019; 27;24(6):2115:2124.
2- World Health Organization. MhGAP training manuals for the mhGAP intervention guide for mental, neurological and substance use disorders in non-specialized health settings, version 2.0 (for field testing). 2017; https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/259161. Licença: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO
3- Roberts, R. E. Qualitative Interview Questions: Guidance for Novice Researchers. The Qualitative Report. 2020; 25(9), 3185:3203
4- Proctor E, Silmere H, Raghavan R, Hovmand P, Aarons G, Bunger A, Griffey R, Hensley M. Outcomes for implementation research: conceptual distinctions, measurement challenges, and research agenda. Adm Policy Ment Health. 2011; 38(2):65:76.
5- Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE, Kirsh SR, Alexander JA, Lowery JC. Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implement Sci. 2009; 7;4:50.