IS Theories and Constructs
Theories and Models and Frameworks, Oh My!
Making Sense of Implementation Theories, Models, and Frameworks
- Nilsen, P. (2015). Making sense of implementation theories, models and frameworks. Implementation Science, 10, 53. doi:10.1186/s13012-015-0242-0
TIDIRC: IS Models, Theories, And Frameworks
- Wynn Northon (National Cancer Institute) provides an overview of models, theories, and frameworks used in implementation science. (26 minutes)
- Part of the NCI Training in Dissemination and Implementation Research in Cancer.
D&I Model Selection Tool
- Interactive webtool designed to help researchers and practitioners select the dissemination and implementation model(s) that best fit(s) their research question or practice problem, combine multiple D&I models, adapt the D&I model(s) to the study or practice context, and find existing measures to assess the key constructs of the D&I model(s) selected.
- Damschroder, L. J. (2019). Clarity out of chaos: Use of theory in implementation research. Psychiatry Research. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2019.06.036
- Tabak, R. G., Khoong, E. C., Chambers, D. A., & Brownson, R. C. (2012). Bridging research and practice: Models for dissemination and implementation research. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 43(3), 337-350. doi:1016/j.amepre.2012.05.024
- Mitchell, S. A., Fisher, C. A., Hastings, C. E., Silverman, L. B., & Wallen, G. R. (2010). A thematic analysis of theoretical models for translational science in nursing: Mapping the field. Nursing Outlook, 58(6), 287-300. doi:1016/j.outlook.2010.07.001
- Weiner, B. J., Mettert, K. D., Dorsey, C. N., Nolen, E. A., Stanick, C., Powell, B. J., & Lewis, C. C. (2020). Measuring readiness for implementation: A systematic review of measures’ psychometric and pragmatic properties. Implementation Research and Practice, 1, 2633489520933896.
- Mettert, K., Lewis, C., Dorsey, C., Halko, H., & Weiner, B. (2020). Measuring implementation outcomes: An updated systematic review of measures’ psychometric properties. Implementation Research and Practice, 1, 2633489520936644.
- McHugh, S., Dorsey, C. N., Mettert, K., Purtle, J., Bruns, E., & Lewis, C. C. (2020). Measures of outer setting constructs for implementation research: A systematic review and analysis of psychometric quality. Implementation Research and Practice, 1, 2633489520940022.
Contextual Determinants (Barriers and Facilitators) of Implementation
Determinants of Implementation
- Wynn Northon (National Cancer Institute), ISC3I 2019 Summit
- CFIR Guide – a comprehensive guide to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, including definitions of constructs, qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis tools, and other resources for using CFIR.
- Damschroder, L. J., Aron, D. C., Keith, R. E., Kirsh, S. R., Alexander J. A., & Lowery, J. D. (2009). Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: A consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implementation Science, 4, 50. doi:10.1186/1748-5908-4-50
- Kirk, M. A., Kelley, C., Yankey, N., Birken, S. A., Abadie, B., & Damschroder, L. (2016). A systematic review of the use of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Implementation Science, 11, 72. doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0437-z
Measuring Implementation Process and Milestones: The Stages of Implementation Completion
- Lisa Saldana (Oregon Social Learning Center), ISC3I 2019 Summit
- EPIS Framework website – a comprehensive guide to the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment model, including measures and tools to support its use.
- “Considering the How with the What: Implementation Fidelity to Foster Success” (video), presented by Lisa Saldana (Oregon Social Learning Center) in the Prevention Science & Methodology Group Virtual Grand Rounds, 2018.
Stages of Implmentation completion
- Chamberlain, P., Brown, C. H., & Saldana, L. (2011). Observational measure of implementation progress in community-based settings: The Stages of Implementation Completion (SIC). Implementation Science, 6, 116. doi:10.1186/1748-5908-6-116
- Saldana, L. (2014). The Stages of Implementation Completion for evidence-based practice: Protocol for a mixed methods study. Implementation Science, 9(1), 43.a
Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment
- Aarons, G. A., Green A. E., Willging, C. E., Ehrhart, M. G., Roesch, S. C., Hecht, D. B., & Chaffin, M. J. (2014). Mixed-method study of a conceptual model of evidence-based intervention sustainment across multiple public-sector service settings. Implementation Science, 9, 183.
- Becan, J. E., Bartkowski, J. P., Knight, D. K., Wiley, T. R. A., DiClemente, R., Ducharme, L., …, Aarons, G. A. (2018). A model for rigorously applying the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework in the design and measurement of a large scale collaborative multi-site study. Health & Justice, 6, 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40352-018-0068-3
- Moullin, J. C., Dickson, K. S., Stadnick, N. A., Rabin, B., & Aarons, G. A. (2019). Systematic review of the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework. Implementation Science, 14(1), 1. doi:10.1186/s13012-018-0842-6
Outcomes for Implementation Research: Conceptual Distinctions, Measurement Challenges, and Research Agenda
- Proctor, E., Silmere, H., Raghavan, R., Hovmand, P., Aarons, G., Bunger, A., Griffey, R., & Hensley, M. (2011). Outcomes for implementation research: Conceptual distinctions, measurement challenges, and research agenda. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 38, 65-76. doi:10.1007/s10488-010-0319-7
Outcomes and Evaluation in Implementation Research: Key Issues and Examples from RE-AIM
- Russell Glasgow (University of Colorado School of Medicine), ISC3I 2019 Summit
- RE-AIM Framework website – a comprehensive guide to the RE-AIM framework, including measures and tools to support its use.
- “Reach Indicators and Implementation Science Metrics” (slides), presented by Brian Mustanski (Northwestern University) at the 2018 Inter-CFAR HIV Implementation Science Workshop
- “Using Modeling to Set Programmatic Goals for HIV Prevention in MSM” (slides), presented by Patrick Sullivan (Emory University) at the 2018 Inter-CFAR HIV Implementation Science Workshop
- “Partner-based HIV Care and Treatment for Expectant Couples in Rural Mozambique” (slides), presented by Carolyn Audet (Vanderbilt University Medical Center) at the 2018 Inter-CFAR HIV Implementation Science Workshop
- “Experience Applying Pragmatic Models for D&I Research: Current and Future Directions for the RE-AIM Planning and Evaluation Model” (video), presented by Russ Glasgow (University of Colorado, Denver) in the Prevention Science & Methodology Group Virtual Grand Rounds, 2018.
- Lewis, C. C., Fischer, S., Weiner, B. J., Stanick, C., Kim, M., & Martinez, R. G. (2015). Outcomes for implementation science: An enhanced systematic review of instruments using evidence-based rating criteria. Implementation Science, 10, 155. doi:10.1186/s13012-015-0342-x
- Glasgow, R. E., Vogt, T. M., & Boles, S. M. (1999). Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework. American Journal of Public Health, 89(9), 1322-1327.
- Glasgow, R. E., Harden, S. M., Gaglio, B., Rabin, B., Smith, M. L., Porter, G. C., Ory, M. G., & Estabrooks, P. A. (2019). RE-AIM planning and evaluation framework: Adapting to new science and practice with a 20-year review. Frontiers in Public Health, 7, 64. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2019.00064.
- Kessler, R. S., Purcell, E. P., Glasgow, R. E., Klesges, L. M., Benkeser, R. M., & Peek, C. J. (2013). What does it mean to “employ” the RE-AIM model? Evaluation and the Health Professions, 36(1), 44-66. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163278712446066