Making sense of implementation theories, models and frameworks

Per Nilsen, Per Nilsen

Abstract

Background: Implementation science has progressed towards increased use of theoretical approaches to provide better understanding and explanation of how and why implementation succeeds or fails. The aim of this article is to propose a taxonomy that distinguishes between different categories of theories, models and frameworks in implementation science, to facilitate appropriate selection and application of relevant approaches in implementation research and practice and to foster cross-disciplinary dialogue among implementation researchers.

Discussion: Theoretical approaches used in implementation science have three overarching aims: describing and/or guiding the process of translating research into practice (process models); understanding and/or explaining what influences implementation outcomes (determinant frameworks, classic theories, implementation theories); and evaluating implementation (evaluation frameworks). This article proposes five categories of theoretical approaches to achieve three overarching aims. These categories are not always recognized as separate types of approaches in the literature. While there is overlap between some of the theories, models and frameworks, awareness of the differences is important to facilitate the selection of relevant approaches. Most determinant frameworks provide limited "how-to" support for carrying out implementation endeavours since the determinants usually are too generic to provide sufficient detail for guiding an implementation process. And while the relevance of addressing barriers and enablers to translating research into practice is mentioned in many process models, these models do not identify or systematically structure specific determinants associated with implementation success. Furthermore, process models recognize a temporal sequence of implementation endeavours, whereas determinant frameworks do not explicitly take a process perspective of implementation.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Three aims of the use of theoretical approaches in implementation science and the five categories of theories, models and frameworks.

References

    1. Eccles M, Grimshaw J, Walker A, Johnston M, Pitts N. Changing the behavior of healthcare professionals: the use of theory in promoting the uptake of research findings. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005;58:107–12.
    1. Davies P, Walker A, Grimshaw J. Theories of behavior change in studies of guideline implementation. Proc Br Psychol Soc. 2003;11:120.
    1. Michie S, Johnston M, Abraham C, Lawton R, Parker D, Walker A. Making psychological theory useful for implementing evidence based practice: a consensus approach. Qual Saf Health Care. 2005;14:26–33.
    1. Sales A, Smith J, Curran G, Kochevar L. Models, strategies, and tools: theory in implementing evidence-based findings into health care practice. J Gen Intern Med. 2006;21:S43–9.
    1. Kitson AL, Harvey G, McCormack B. Enabling the implementation of evidence-based practice: a conceptual framework. Qual Health Care. 1998;7:149–58.
    1. ICEBeRG Designing theoretically-informed implementation interventions. Implement Sci. 2006;1:4.
    1. Godin G, Bélanger-Gravel A, Eccles M, Grimshaw J. Healthcare professionals’ intentions and behaviours: a systematic review of studies based on social cognitive theories. Implement Sci. 2008;3:36.
    1. Mitchell SA, Fisher CA, Hastings CE, Silverman LB, Wallen GR. A thematic analysis of theoretical models for translating science in nursing: mapping the field. Nurs Outlook. 2010;58:287–300.
    1. Rycroft-Malone J, Bucknall T. Theory, Frameworks, and Models: Laying Down the Groundwork. In: Rycroft-Malone J, Bucknall T, editors. Models and Frameworks for Implementing Evidence-Based Practice: Linking Evidence to Action. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell; 2010. pp. 23–50.
    1. Cane J, O’Connor D, Michie S. Validation of the theoretical domains framework for use in behaviour change and implementation research. Implement Sci. 2012;7:37.
    1. Martinez RG, Lewis CC, Weiner BJ. Instrumentation issues in implementation science. Implement Sci. 2014;9:118.
    1. Eccles MP, Mittman BS. Welcome to implementation science. Implement Sci. 2006;1:1.
    1. Graham ID, Logan J, Harrison MB, Straus SE, Tetroe J, Caswell W, et al. Lost in knowledge translation: time for a map? J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2006;26:13–24.
    1. Estabrooks CA, Thompson DS, Lovely JE, Hofmeyer A. A guide to knowledge translation theory. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2006;26:25–36.
    1. Wilson KM, Brady TJ, Lesesne C, on behalf of the NCCDPHP Work Group on Translation An organizing framework for translation in public health: the knowledge to action framework. Prev Chronic Dis. 2011;8:A46.
    1. Rabin BA, Brownson RC. Developing the Terminology for Dissemination and Implementation Research. In: Brownson RC, Colditz GA, Proctor EK, editors. Dissemination and Implementation Research in Health. New York: Oxford University Press; 2012. pp. 23–51.
    1. Greenhalgh T, Robert G, Bate P, Macfarlane F, Kyriakidou O. Diffusion of Innovations in Service Organisations: A Systematic Literature Review. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing; 2005.
    1. Jones K. Mission drift in qualitative research, or moving toward a systematic review of qualitative studies, moving back to a more systematic narrative review. Qual Rep. 2004;9:95–112.
    1. Cronin P, Ryan F, Coughlan M. Undertaking a literature review: a step-by-step approach. Br J Nurs. 2008;17:38–43.
    1. Rycroft-Malone J, Bucknall T. Models and Frameworks for Implementing Evidence-Based Practice: Linking Evidence to Action. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell; 2010.
    1. Nutley SM, Walter I, Davies HTO. Using evidence: how research can inform public services. Bristol: The Policy Press; 2007.
    1. Grol R, Wensing M, Eccles M. Improving Patient Care: The Implementation of Change in Clinical Practice. Edinburgh: Elsevier; 2005.
    1. Straus S, Tetroe J, Graham ID. Knowledge Translation in Health Care. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons; 2009.
    1. Brownson RC, Colditz GA, Proctor EK. Dissemination and Implementation Research in Health. New York: Oxford University Press; 2012.
    1. Graham ID, Tetroe J. Some theoretical underpinnings of knowledge translation. Acad Emerg Med. 2007;14:936–41.
    1. Flottorp SA, Oxman AD, Krause J, Musila NR, Wensing M, Godycki-Cwirko M, et al. A checklist for identifying determinants of practice: a systematic review and synthesis of frameworks and taxonomies of factors that prevent or enable improvements in healthcare professional practice. Implement Sci. 2013;8:35.
    1. Meyers DC, Durlak JA, Wandersman A. The Quality Implementation Framework: a synthesis of critical steps in the implementation process. Am J Community Psychol. 2012;50:462–80.
    1. Tabak RG, Khoong EC, Chambers DA, Brownson RC. Bridging research and practice: models for dissemination and implementation research. Am J Prev Med. 2012;43:337–50.
    1. Frankfort-Nachmias C, Nachmias D. Research Methods in the Social Sciences. London: Arnold; 1996.
    1. Wacker JG. A definition of theory: research guidelines for different theory-building research methods in operations management. J Oper Manag. 1998;16:361–85.
    1. Carpiano RM, Daley DM. A guide and glossary on postpositivist theory building for population health. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2006;60:564–70.
    1. Bunge M. Scientific Research 1: The Search for System. New York: Springer; 1967.
    1. Reynolds PD. A Primer in Theory Construction. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill Educational Publishing; 1971.
    1. Dubin R. Theory Building. New York: Free Press; 1978.
    1. Hunt SD. Modern Marketing Theory: Critical Issues in the Philosophy of Marketing Science. Cincinnati, OH: Southwestern Publishing; 1991.
    1. Bluedorn AC, Evered RD. Middle Range Theory and the Strategies of Theory Construction. In: Pinder CC, Moore LF, editors. Middle Range Theory and The Study of Organizations. Boston, MA: Martinus Nijhoff; 1980. pp. 19–32.
    1. Cairney P. Understanding Public Policy—Theories and Issues. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan; 2012.
    1. Sabatier PA. Theories of the Policy Process. 2. Boulder, CO: Westview Press; 2007.
    1. Kitson AL, Rycroft-Malone J, Harvey G, McCormack B, Seers K, Titchen A. Evaluating the successful implementation of evidence into practice using the PARiHS framework: theoretical and practical challenges. Implement Sci. 2008;3:1.
    1. Huberman M. Research utilization: the state of the art. Knowl Policy. 1994;7:13–33.
    1. Landry R, Amara N, Lamari M. Climbing the ladder of research utilization: evidence from social science. Sci Commun. 2001;22:396–422.
    1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR). About knowledge translation. []. Retrieved 18 December 2014.
    1. Davis SM, Peterson JC, Helfrich CD, Cunningham-Sabo L. Introduction and conceptual model for utilization of prevention research. Am J Prev Med. 2007;33:1S.
    1. Majdzadeh R, Sadighi J, Nejat S, Mahani AS, Ghdlami J. Knowledge translation for research utilization: design of a knowledge translation model at Teheran University of Medical Science. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2008;28:270–7.
    1. Graham ID, Tetroe J, KT Theories Group . Planned Action Theories. In: Straus S, Tetroe J, Graham ID, editors. Knowledge Translation in Health Care. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing; 2009. pp. 185–95.
    1. Rycroft-Malone J, Bucknall T. Analysis and Synthesis of Models and Frameworks. In: Rycroft-Malone J, Bucknall T, editors. Models and Frameworks for Implementing Evidence-Based Practice: Linking Evidence to Action. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell; 2010. pp. 223–45.
    1. Stetler CB. Stetler model. In: Rycroft-Malone J, Bucknall T, editors. Models and Frameworks for Implementing Evidence-Based Practice: Linking Evidence to Action. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell; 2010. pp. 51–82.
    1. Stevens KR. The impact of evidence-based practice in nursing and the next big ideas. Online J Issues Nurs. 2013;18(2):4.
    1. Titler MG, Kleiber C, Steelman V, Goode C, Rakel B, Barry-Walker J, et al. Infusing research into practice to promote quality care. Nurs Res. 1995;43:307–13.
    1. Titler MG, Kleiber C, Steelman VJ, Rakel BA, Budreau G, Everett LQ, et al. The Iowa Model of evidence-based practice to promote quality care. Crit Care Nurs Clin North Am. 2001;13:497–509.
    1. Logan J, Graham I. Toward a comprehensive interdisciplinary model of health care research use. Sci Commun. 1998;20:227–46.
    1. Logan J, Graham I. The Ottawa Model of Research Use. In: Rycroft-Malone J, Bucknall T, editors. Models and Frameworks for Implementing Evidence-Based Practice: Linking Evidence to Action. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell; 2010. pp. 83–108.
    1. Grol R, Wensing M. What drives change? Barriers to and incentives for achieving evidence-based practice. Med J Aust. 2004;180:S57–60.
    1. Pronovost PJ, Berenholtz SM, Needham DM. Translating evidence into practice: a model for large scale knowledge translation. BMJ. 2008;337:a1714.
    1. Field B, Booth A, Ilott I, Gerrish K. Using the Knowledge to Action Framework in practice: a citation analysis and systematic review. Implement Sci. 2014;9:172.
    1. Stetler C. Refinement of the Stetler/Marram Model for application of research findings to practice. Nurs Outlook. 1994;42:15–25.
    1. Durlak JA, DuPre EP. Implementation matters: a review of research on the influence of implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting implementation. Am J Community Psychol. 2008;41:327–50.
    1. Gurses AP, Marsteller JA, Ozok AA, Xiao Y, Owens S, Pronovost PJ. Using an interdisciplinary approach to identify factors that affect clinicians’ compliance with evidence-based guidelines. Crit Care Med. 2010;38(8 Suppl):S282–91.
    1. Cochrane LJ, Olson CA, Murray S, Dupuis M, Tooman T, Hayes S. Gaps between knowing and doing: understanding and assessing the barriers to optimal health care. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2007;27:94–102.
    1. 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;4:50.
    1. Ferlie E, Shortell SM. Improving the quality of health care in the United Kingdom and the United States: a framework for change. Milbank Q. 2001;79:281–315.
    1. Jacobson N, Butterill D, Goering P. Development of a framework for knowledge translation: understanding user context. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2003;8:94–9.
    1. Blase KA, Van Dyke M, Fixsen DL, Bailey FW. Implementation Science: Key Concepts, Themes and Evidence for Practitioners in Educational Psychology. In: Kelly B, Perkins DF, editors. Handbook of Implementation Science for Psychology in Education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2012. pp. 13–34.
    1. Rycroft-Malone J. Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) In: Rycroft-Malone J, Bucknall T, editors. Models and Frameworks for Implementing Evidence-Based Practice: Linking Evidence to Action. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell; 2010. pp. 109–36.
    1. Helfrich CD, Damschroder LJ, Hagedorn HJ, Daggett GS, Sahay A, Ritchie M, et al. A critical synthesis of literature on the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) framework. Implement Sci. 2010;5:82.
    1. Michie S, Atkins L, West R. A guide to using the Behaviour Change Wheel. London: Silverback Publishing; 2014.
    1. Fixsen DL, Naoom SF, Blase KA, Friedman RM, Wallace F. Implementation Research: A Synthesis of the Literature. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute; 2005.
    1. Holmes BJ, Finegood DT, Riley BL, Best A. Systems Thinking in Dissemination and Implementation Research. In: Brownson RC, Colditz GA, Proctor EK, editors. Dissemination and Implementation Research in Health. New York: Oxford University Press; 2012. pp. 192–212.
    1. Légaré F, Ratté S, Gravel K, Graham ID. Barriers and facilitators to implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice. Update of a systematic review of health professionals’ perceptions. Patient Educ Couns. 2008;73:526–35.
    1. Johnson M, Jackson R, Guillaume L, Meier P, Goyder E. Barriers and facilitators to implementing screening and brief intervention for alcohol misuse: a systematic review of qualitative evidence. J Public Health. 2011;33:412–21.
    1. Verweij LM, Proper KI, Leffelaar ER, Weel ANH, Nauta AP, Hulshof CTJ, et al. Barriers and facilitators to implementation of an occupational health guideline aimed at preventing weight gain among employees in the Netherlands. J Occup Environ Med. 2012;54:954–60.
    1. Broyles LM, Rodriguez KL, Kraemer KL, Sevick MA, Price PA, Gordon AJ. A qualitative study of anticipated barriers and facilitators to the implementation of nurse-delivered alcohol screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment for hospitalized patients in a Veterans Affairs medical centre. Addiction Sci Clin Pract. 2012;7:7.
    1. Dopson S, Fitzgerald L. The Active Role of Context. In: Dopson S, Fitzgerald L, editors. Knowledge to Action? Evidence-Based Health Care in Context. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2005. pp. 79–103.
    1. Ashton CM, Khan MM, Johnson ML, Walder A, Stanberry E, Beyth RJ, et al. A quasi-experimental test of an intervention to increase the use of thiazide-based treatment regimens for people with hypertension. Implement Sci. 2007;2:5.
    1. Mohr DC, VanDeusen LC, Meterko M. Predicting healthcare employees’ participation in an office redesign program: attitudes, norms and behavioral control. Implement Sci. 2008;3:47.
    1. Scott SD, Plotnikoff RC, Karunamuni N, Bize R, Rodgers W. Factors influencing the adoption of an innovation: an examination of the uptake of the Canadian Heart Health Kit (HHK) Implement Sci. 2008;3:41.
    1. Zardo P, Collie A. Predicting research use in a public health policy environment: results of a logistic regression analysis. Implement Sci. 2014;9:142.
    1. Gabbay J, Le May A. Evidence based guidelines or collectively constructed “mindlines”? Ethnographic study of knowledge management in primary care. Br Med J. 2011;329:1–5.
    1. Fishbein M, Ajzen I. Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behaviour. New York: John Wiley; 1975.
    1. Bandura A. Self-efficacy: towards a unifying theory of behavioural change. Psychol Rev. 1977;84:191–215.
    1. Bandura A. Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Cognitive Social Theory. Englewood-Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1986.
    1. Triandis HC. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation; Beliefs, Attitude, and values: 1979. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press; 1979. Values, Attitudes, and Interpersonal Behaviour; pp. 195–259.
    1. Ajzen I. Attitudes, Personality and Behavior. Milton Keynes: Open University Press; 1988.
    1. Nilsen P, Roback K, Broström A, Ellström PE. Creatures of habit: accounting for the role of habit in implementation research on clinical behaviour change. Implement Sci. 2012;7:53.
    1. Hammond KR. Principles of Organization in Intuitive and Analytical Cognition. Boulder, CO: Center for Research on Judgment and Policy, University of Colorado; 1981.
    1. Benner P. From Novice to Expert, Excellence and Power in Clinical Nursing Practice. Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley Publishing; 1984.
    1. Epstein S. Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic unconscious. Am Psychol. 1994;49:709–24.
    1. Ouelette JA, Wood W. Habit and intention in everyday life: the multiple processes by which past behaviour predicts future behaviour. Psychol Bull. 1998;124:54–74.
    1. Verplanken B, Aarts H. Habit, attitude, and planned behaviour: is habit an empty construct or an interesting case of goal-directed automaticity? Eur Rev Soc Psychol. 1999;10:101–34.
    1. Eccles MP, Hrisos S, Francis JJ, Steen N, Bosch M, Johnston M. Can the collective intentions of individual professionals within healthcare teams predict the team’s performance: developing methods and theory. Implement Sci. 2009;4:24.
    1. Parchman ML, Scoglio CM, Schumm P. Understanding the implementation of evidence-based care: a structural network approach. Implement Sci. 2011;6:14.
    1. Cunningham FC, Ranmuthugala G, Plumb J, Georgiou A, Westbrook JI, Braithwaite J. Health professional networks as a vector for improving healthcare quality and safety: a systematic review. BMJ Qual Saf. 2011. doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2011-000187.
    1. Mascia D, Cicchetti A. Physician social capital and the reported adoption of evidence-based medicine: exploring the role of structural holes. Soc Sci Med. 2011;72:798–805.
    1. Wallin L, Ewald U, Wikblad K, Scott-Findlay S, Arnetz BB. Understanding work contextual factors: a short-cut to evidence-based practice? Worldviews Evid Based Nurs. 2006;3:153–64.
    1. Meijers JMM, Janssen MAP, Cummings GG, Wallin L, Estabrooks CA, Halfens RYG. Assessing the relationship between contextual factors and research utilization in nursing: systematic literature review. J Adv Nurs. 2006;55:622–35.
    1. Wensing M, Wollersheim H, Grol R. Organizational interventions to implement improvements in patient care: a structured review of reviews. Implement Sci. 2006;1:2.
    1. Gifford W, Davies B, Edwards N, Griffin P, Lybanon V. Managerial leadership for nurses’ use of research evidence: an integrative review of the literature. Worldviews Evid Based Nurs. 2007;4:126–45.
    1. Yano EM. The role of organizational research in implementing evidence-based practice: QUERI series. Implement Sci. 2008;3:29.
    1. French B, Thomas LH, Baker P, Burton CR, Pennington L, Roddam H. What can management theories offer evidence-based practice? A comparative analysis of measurement tools for organizational context. Implement Sci. 2009;4:28.
    1. Parmelli E, Flodgren G, Beyer F, Baillie N, Schaafsma ME, Eccles MP. The effectiveness of strategies to change organisational culture to improve healthcare performance: a systematic review. Implement Sci. 2011;6:33.
    1. Chaudoir SR, Dugan AG, Barr CHI. Measuring factors affecting implementation of health innovations: a systematic review of structural, organizational, provider, patient, and innovation level measures. Implement Sci. 2013;8:22.
    1. Orlikowski W. Improvising organizational transformation over time: a situated change perspective. Inform Syst Res. 1994;7:63–92.
    1. DiMaggio PJ, Powell WW. The New Institutionalism and Organizational Analysis. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press; 1991.
    1. Scott WR. Institutions and Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1995.
    1. Plsek PE, Greenhalgh T. The challenge of complexity in health care. BMJ. 2001;323:625–8.
    1. Waldrop MM. Complexity: The Emerging Science at The Edge of Order and Chaos. London: Viking; 1992.
    1. Rogers EM. Diffusion of Innovations. 5. New York: Free Press; 2003.
    1. Aubert BA, Hamel G. Adoption of smart cards in the medical sector: the Canadian experience. Soc Sci Med. 2001;53:879–94.
    1. Vollink T, Meertens R, Midden CJH. Innovating ‘diffusion of innovation’ theory: innovation characteristics and the intention of utility companies to adopt energy conservation interventions. J Environ Psychol. 2002;22:333–44.
    1. Foy R, MacLennan G, Grimshaw J, Penney G, Campbell M, Grol R. Attributes of clinical recommendations that influence change in practice following audit and feedback. J Clin Epidemiol. 2002;55:717–22.
    1. Oxman AD, Thomson MA, Davis DA, Haynes RB. No magic bullets: a systematic review of 102 trials of interventions to improve professional practice. CMAJ. 1995;153:1423–31.
    1. Grimshaw J, McAuley LM, Bero LA, Grilli R, Oxman AD, Ramsay C, et al. Systematic reviews of effectiveness of quality improvement strategies and programmes. Qual Saf Health Care. 2003;12:298–303.
    1. Walter I, Nutley SM, Davies HTO. Developing a taxonomy of interventions used to increase the impact of research. St. Andrews: University of St Andrews; 2003. Discussion Paper 3, Research Unit for Research Utilisation, University of St. Andrews.
    1. Leeman J, Baernholdt M, Sandelowski M. Developing a theory-based taxonomy of methods for implementing change in practice. J Adv Nurs. 2007;58:191–200.
    1. Estabrooks CA, Derksen L, Winther C, Lavis JN, Scott SD, Wallin L, et al. The intellectual structure and substance of the knowledge utilization field: a longitudinal author co-citation analysis, 1945 to 2004. Implement Sci. 2008;3:49.
    1. Klein KJ, Sorra JS. The challenge of innovation implementation. Acad Manage Rev. 1996;21:1055–80.
    1. Zahra AS, George G. Absorptive capacity: a review, reconceptualization and extension. Acad Manage Rev. 2002;27:185–203.
    1. Weiner BJ. A theory of organizational readiness for change. Implement Sci. 2009;4:67.
    1. Michie S, van Stralen MM, West R. The behaviour change wheel: a new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions. Implement Sci. 2011;6:42.
    1. May C, Finch T. Implementing, embedding and integrating practices: an outline of Normalization Process Theory. Sociology. 2009;43:535.
    1. May C, Finch T, Mair F, Ballini L, Dowrick C, Eccles M, et al. Understanding the implementation of complex interventions in health care: the normalization process model. Implement Sci. 2007;7:148.
    1. Finch TL, Rapley T, Girling M, Mair FS, Murray E, Treweek S, et al. Improving the normalization of complex interventions: measure development based on normalization process theory (NoMAD): study protocol. Implement Sci. 2013;8:43.
    1. Murray E, Treweek S, Pope C, MacFarlane A, Ballini L, Dowrick C, et al. Normalisation process theory: a framework for developing, evaluating and implementing complex interventions. BMC Med. 2010;8:63.
    1. Glasgow RE, Vogt TM, Boles SM. Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework. Am J Public Health. 1999;89:1322–7.
    1. Green LW, Kreuter MW. Health Program Planning: An Educational and Ecological Approach. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2005.
    1. Proctor E, Silmere H, RaghaVan R, Hovmand P, Aarons G, Bunger A, et al. Outcomes for implementation research: conceptual distinctions, measurement challenges, and research agenda. Admin Policy Mental Health. 2011;38:65–76.
    1. Phillips CJ, Marshall AP, Chaves NJ, Lin IB, Loy CT, Rees G, et al. Experiences of using Theoretical Domains Framework across diverse clinical environments: a qualitative study. J Multidiscip Healthc. 2015;8:139–46.
    1. Fleming A, Bradley C, Cullinan S, Byrne S. Antibiotic prescribing in long-term care facilities: a qualitative, multidisciplinary investigation. BMJ Open. 2014;4(11)
    1. McEvoy R, Ballini L, Maltoni S, O’Donnell CA, Mair FS, MacFarlane A. A qualitative systematic review of studies using the normalization process theory to research implementation processes. Implement Sci. 2014;9:2.
    1. Connell LA, McMahon NE, Redfern J, Watkins CL, Eng JJ. Development of a behaviour change intervention to increase upper limb exercise in stroke rehabilitation. Implement Sci. 2015;10:34.
    1. Praveen D, Patel A, Raghu A, Clifford GD, Maulik PK, Abdul AM, et al. Development and field evaluation of a mobile clinical decision support system for cardiovascular diseases in rural India. JMIR mHealth uHealth. 2014;2
    1. Estabrooks CA, Squires JE, Cummings GG, Birdell JM, Norton PG. Development and assessment of the Alberta Context Tool. BMC Health Serv Res. 2009;9:234.
    1. McCormack B, McCarthy G, Wright J, Slater P, Coffey A. Development and testing of the Context Assessment Index (CAI) Worldviews Evid Based Nurs. 2009;6:27–35.
    1. Damschroder LJ, Lowery JC. Evaluation of a large-scale weight management program using the consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR) Implement Sci. 2013;8:51.
    1. Dyson J, Lawton R, Jackson C, Cheater F. Development of a theory-based instrument to identify barriers and levers to best hand hygiene practice among healthcare practitioners. Implement Sci. 2013;8:111.
    1. Melnyk BM, Fineout-Overholt E, Mays MZ. The Evidence-Based Practice Beliefs and Implementation Scales: psychometric properties of two new instruments. Worldviews Evid Based Nurs. 2008;5:208–16.
    1. Nilsson Kajermo K, Boström A-M, Thompson DS, Hutchinson AM, Estabrooks CA, Wallin L. The BARRIERS scale—the barriers to research utilization scale: a systematic review. Implement Sci. 2010;5:32.
    1. Jacobs SR, Weiner BJ, Bunger AC. Context matters: measuring implementation climate among individuals and groups. Implement Sci. 2014;9:46.
    1. Gagnon M-P, Labarthe J, Légaré F, Ouimet M, Estabrooks CA, Roch G, et al. Measuring organizational readiness for knowledge translation in chronic care. Implement Sci. 2011;6:72.
    1. Osigweh CAB. Concept fallibility in organizational science. Acad Manage Rev. 1989;14:579–94.
    1. May C. Towards a general theory of implementation. Implement Sci. 2013;8:18.
    1. Michie S, Abraham C, Eccles MP, Francis JJ, Hardeman W, Jonston M. Strengthening evaluation and implementation by specifying components of behaviour change interventions: a study protocol. Implement Sci. 2011;6:10.
    1. Oxman AD, Fretheim A, Flottorp S. The OFF theory of research utilization. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005;58:113–6.
    1. Bhattacharyya O, Reeves S, Garfinkel S, Zwarenstein M. Designing theoretically-informed implementation interventions: fine in theory, but evidence of effectiveness in practice is needed. Implement Sci. 2006;1:5.
    1. Fletcher GJO. Psychology and common sense. Am Psychol. 1984;39:203–13.
    1. Cacioppo JT. Common sense, intuition and theory in personality and social psychology. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2004;8:114–22.
    1. Kuhn TS. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 2. Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press; 1970.
    1. Greenwald AG, Pratkanis AR, Leippe MR, Baumgardner MH. Under what conditions does theory obstruct research progress? Psychol Rev. 1986;93:216–29.

Source: PubMed

Sponsor e collaboratori

Condizioni mediche

Interventi farmacologici

3
Sottoscrivi