Implementation Science

2014 ◽  
Vol 222 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Terje Ogden ◽  
Dean L. Fixsen

The field of implementation research is remarkable in many ways and, even as a young discipline, it has expanded well beyond the expectations of even its most optimistic supporters and stakeholders. In this overview we provide a selective rather than systematic review to serve as a relevant introduction to the field of implementation science. We highlight central concepts, strategies, frameworks, and research outcomes. These highlights draw heavily on the seminal systematic reviews from Brownson, Colditz, and Proctor (2012) , Fixsen, Naoom, Blase, Friedman, and Wallace (2005) , and Greenhalgh, Robert, MacFarlane, Bate, and Kyriakidou (2004) and on a thorough comparative review of implementation frameworks conducted by Meyers, Durlak, and Wandersman (2012) . Looking ahead to future implementation research, we consider research challenges related to the scaling up of programs, striking a good balance between treatment integrity and local adaptation, measuring implementation quality, and program sustainability.

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Roll ◽  
Stephanie Moulton ◽  
Jodi Sandfort

Increased pressure for evidence-based practices in policymaking and administration has led to the growth of a new research stream of implementation science. Little is known about how this new stream of research compares with scholarship on policy implementation within public administration. This paper provides a comparative review of more than 1,500 journal articles on policy and program implementation published between 2004-2013. Using bibliometric analysis and a content analysis of abstracts, implementation articles within public affairs journals and in the emerging implementation science stream are analyzed in terms of their content, methods, and focus. Following a multi-level implementation framework, this analysis considers the level at which research is taking place within the different venues of implementation research. Through this systematic review, this paper provides new insights about the current state of research, opening up new avenues for scholars to substantively engage with and contribute to this important area of study.


2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alison Tumilowicz ◽  
Marie T Ruel ◽  
Gretel Pelto ◽  
David Pelletier ◽  
Eva C Monterrosa ◽  
...  

AbstractMalnutrition in all its forms has risen on global and national agendas in recent years because of the recognition of its magnitude and its consequences for a wide range of human, social, and economic outcomes. Although the WHO, national governments, and other organizations have endorsed targets and identified appropriate policies, programs, and interventions, a major challenge lies in implementing these with the scale and quality needed to achieve population impact. This paper presents an approach to implementation science in nutrition (ISN) that builds upon concepts developed in other policy domains and addresses critical gaps in linking knowledge to effective action. ISN is defined here as an interdisciplinary body of theory, knowledge, frameworks, tools, and approaches whose purpose is to strengthen implementation quality and impact. It includes a wide range of methods and approaches to identify and address implementation bottlenecks; means to identify, evaluate, and scale up implementation innovations; and strategies to enhance the utilization of existing knowledge, tools, and frameworks based on the evolving science of implementation. The ISN framework recognizes that quality implementation requires alignment across 5 domains: the intervention, policy, or innovation being implemented; the implementing organization(s); the enabling environment of policies and stakeholders; the individuals, households, and communities of interest; and the strategies and decision processes used at various stages of the implementation process. The success of aligning these domains through implementation research requires a culture of inquiry, evaluation, learning, and response among program implementers; an action-oriented mission among the research partners; continuity of funding for implementation research; and resolving inherent tensions between program implementation and research. The Society for Implementation Science in Nutrition is a recently established membership society to advance the science and practice of nutrition implementation at various scales and in varied contexts.


Author(s):  
Ana A. Baumann ◽  
Leopoldo J. Cabassa ◽  
Shannon Wiltsey Stirman

This chapter focuses on adaptations in the context of dissemination and implementation research and practice. Consistent with the existing literature, the authors recommend that adaptations be proactively and iteratively determined, strongly informed by a variety of stakeholders, and that efforts be made to carefully describe and document the nature of the adaptations and evaluate their impact on desired service, health, and implementation outcomes. While this chapter focuses on adaptations to interventions and the context of practice, the authors also note that adaptations may need to be made to implementation strategies. Following the call by Proctor and colleagues for further precision in defining and operationalizing implementation strategies, and based on evidence that scholars are not necessarily reporting what and how they are adapting the interventions, scholars are urged to define and evaluate the adaptations they are making not only to the interventions and context of practice but also to the implementation strategies.


Author(s):  
McKay Moore Sohlberg ◽  
Priya Kucheria ◽  
Stephen Fickas ◽  
Shari L. Wade

Purpose The purpose of this research article is to describe two very different lines of brain injury treatment research, both of which illuminate the benefits of implementation science. Method The article first describes the development and pilot of a computerized cognitive intervention and highlights how adherence to implementation science principles improved the design of the intervention. Second, the article describes the application of implementation science to the development of assistive technology for cognition. Results The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR; Damschroder et al., 2009) and the menu of implementation research strategies by Powell et al. (2012) provide a roadmap for cognitive rehabilitation researchers to attend to factors in the implementation climate that can improve the development, usability, and adoptability of new treatment methods. Conclusion Attention to implementation science research principles has increased the feasibility and efficacy of both impairment-based cognitive rehabilitation programs and assistive technology for cognition.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel Davis ◽  
Brian Mittman ◽  
Madelene Boyton ◽  
Aoife Keohane ◽  
Lucy Goulding ◽  
...  

Abstract The authors have removed this preprint from Research Square.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. e0250379
Author(s):  
Rosie O’Shea ◽  
Natalie Taylor ◽  
Ashley Crook ◽  
Chris Jacobs ◽  
Yoon Jung Kang ◽  
...  

Background Integration of genetic testing into routine oncology care could improve access to testing. This systematic review investigated interventions and the tailored implementation strategies aimed at increasing access to genetic counselling and testing and identifying hereditary cancer in oncology. Methods The search strategy results were reported using the PRISMA statement and four electronic databases were searched. Eligible studies included routine genetic testing for breast and ovarian cancer or uptake after universal tumour screening for colorectal or endometrial cancer. The titles and abstracts were reviewed and the full text articles screened for eligibility. Data extraction was preformed using a designed template and study appraisal was assessed using an adapted Newcastle Ottawa Scale. Extracted data were mapped to Proctor’s et al outcomes and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and qualitatively synthesised. Results Twenty-seven studies, published up to May 2020, met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-five studies ranged from poor (72%), fair to good (28%) quality. Most interventions identified were complex (multiple components) such as; patient or health professional education, interdisciplinary practice and a documentation or system change. Forty-eight percent of studies with complex interventions demonstrated on average a 35% increase in access to genetic counselling and a 15% increase in testing completion. Mapping of study outcomes showed that 70% and 32% of the studies aligned with either the service and client or the implementation level outcome and 96% to the process or inner setting domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Conclusion Existing evidence suggests that complex interventions have a potentially positive effect towards genetic counselling and testing completion rates in oncology services. Studies of sound methodological quality that explore a greater breadth of pre and post implementation outcomes and informed by theory are needed. Such research could inform future service delivery models for the integration of genetics into oncology services.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 263348952110494
Author(s):  
Rachel C. Shelton ◽  
Prajakta Adsul ◽  
April Oh ◽  
Nathalie Moise ◽  
Derek M. Griffith

Background Despite the promise of implementation science (IS) to reduce health inequities, critical gaps and opportunities remain in the field to promote health equity. Prioritizing racial equity and antiracism approaches is critical in these efforts, so that IS does not inadvertently exacerbate disparities based on the selection of frameworks, methods, interventions, and strategies that do not reflect consideration of structural racism and its impacts. Methods Grounded in extant research on structural racism and antiracism, we discuss the importance of advancing understanding of how structural racism as a system shapes racial health inequities and inequitable implementation of evidence-based interventions among racially and ethnically diverse communities. We outline recommendations for explicitly applying an antiracism lens to address structural racism and its manifests through IS. An anti-racism lens provides a framework to guide efforts to confront, address, and eradicate racism and racial privilege by helping people identify racism as a root cause of health inequities and critically examine how it is embedded in policies, structures, and systems that differentially affect racially and ethnically diverse populations. Results We provide guidance for the application of an antiracism lens in the field of IS, focusing on select core elements in implementation research, including: (1) stakeholder engagement; (2) conceptual frameworks and models; (3) development, selection, adaptation of EBIs; (4) evaluation approaches; and (5) implementation strategies. We highlight the need for foundational grounding in antiracism frameworks among implementation scientists to facilitate ongoing self-reflection, accountability, and attention to racial equity, and provide questions to guide such reflection and consideration. Conclusion We conclude with a reflection on how this is a critical time for IS to prioritize focus on justice, racial equity, and real-world equitable impact. Moving IS towards making consideration of health equity and an antiracism lens foundational is central to strengthening the field and enhancing its impact. Plain language abstract There are important gaps and opportunities that exist in promoting health equity through implementation science. Historically, the commonly used frameworks, measures, interventions, strategies, and approaches in the field have not been explicitly focused on equity, nor do they consider the role of structural racism in shaping health and inequitable delivery of evidence-based practices/programs. This work seeks to build off of the long history of research on structural racism and health, and seeks to provide guidance on how to apply an antiracism lens to select core elements of implementation research. We highlight important opportunities for the field to reflect and consider applying an antiracism approach in: 1) stakeholder/community engagement; 2) use of conceptual frameworks; 3) development, selection and adaptation of evidence-based interventions; 4) evaluation approaches; 5) implementation strategies (e.g., how to deliver evidence-based practices, programs, policies); and 6) how researchers conduct their research, with a focus on racial equity. This is an important time for the field of implementation science to prioritize a foundational focus on justice, equity, and real-world impact through the application of an anti-racism lens in their work.


Author(s):  
Leonardo Bonini Fischetti ◽  
Julia Zaccarelli Magalhães ◽  
André Rinaldi Fukushima ◽  
Paula Waziry ◽  
Esther Lopes Ricci

Kabuki Syndrome is rare and poorly documented, initially mentioned by Niikawa and Kuroki in 1981. The prevalence of the syndrome among live births is 1:32,000. Case reports are now available, which correlates to improved techniques for accurate diagnosis. This study focused on a systematic comparative review of the phenotypes of individuals with Kabuki Syndrome, with the purpose to facilitate diagnosis. The systematic review was done with a bibliographic survey of case studies using the following databases: Pubmed, Science Direct and Google Scholar, in conjunction with the following key-words: Kabuki syndrome, phenotype, KMT2D and case report. The literature shows that patients with this syndrome present five main characteristics, besides several types of secondary phenotypes. These characteristics present variations in permeability as well as expressivity of some genes in individuals, therefore, a characterization through phenotype alone becomes limited, making it necessary to perform genetic analysis for differential diagnosis. In order to increase the knowledge and elucidate mechanisms of Kabuki syndrome, we suggest further studies that utilize animal models.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bryan R Garner ◽  
Sheila Patel ◽  
M. Alexis Kirk

Abstract Background: The challenge of implementing evidence-based innovations within practice settings is a significant public health issue the field of implementation research (IR) is focused on addressing. Significant amounts of funding, time, and effort have been invested in IR to date, yet there remains significant room for advancement, especially regarding IR’s development of scientific theories as defined by the National Academy of Sciences (i.e., a comprehensive explanation of the relationship between variables that is supported by a vast body of evidence). Research priority setting (i.e., promoting consensus about areas where research effort will have wide benefits to society) is a key approach to helping accelerate research advancements. Thus, building upon existing IR, general principles of data reduction, and a general framework for moderated mediation, this article identifies priority domains, aims, and testable hypotheses for IR and describes a scoping review protocol to identify and map the extent to which IR has examined these priorities to date.Methods: Implementation Science is the leading journal for publishing IR and receives over 800 submissions annually. Thus, this scoping review will focus on IR published in Implementation Science between its inception in 2006 and 12/31/2019. The current scoping review and evidence map protocol has been developed in accordance with the approach developed by Arksey & O’Malley and advanced by Levac, Colquhoun, and O’Brien. All research articles and short reports will be reviewed. Because scoping reviews seek to provide an overview of the identified evidence base rather than synthesize findings from across studies, we plan to use our data-charting form to provide a descriptive overview of implementation research to-date and summarize the research via one or more summary tables. We will use the priority aims and testable hypotheses (PATH) diagram, which integrates the four priority domains, three priority aims, and four priority testable hypotheses, to develop a map of the evidence (or lack thereof).Discussion: This scoping review and evidence map is intended to help accelerate IR focused on one or more of IR’s priority aims and testable hypotheses, which in turn will accelerate IR’s development of NAS-defined scientific theories and, subsequently, improvements in public health.Systematic review registration: Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/3vhuj/


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document