scholarly journals A Systematic Review of New Approaches to STI Screening Framed in the COM-B Model of Implementation Science

2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Alison Footman ◽  
Dorris Dagama ◽  
Catherine Hogan Smith ◽  
Barbara Van Der Pol
2021 ◽  
pp. 109-120
Author(s):  
Maria Helena Pedrosa ◽  
J. C. Guedes ◽  
Isabel Dias ◽  
Ana Salazar

AIDS ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 177-191
Author(s):  
Sylvia Shangani ◽  
Nidhi Bhaskar ◽  
Natasha Richmond ◽  
Don Operario ◽  
Jacob J. van den Berg

2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Cara C. Lewis ◽  
Sarah Fischer ◽  
Bryan J. Weiner ◽  
Cameo Stanick ◽  
Mimi Kim ◽  
...  

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.


2015 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 298-316 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ursula Reichenpfader ◽  
Siw Carlfjord ◽  
Per Nilsen

Purpose – This study aims to systematically review published empirical research on leadership as a determinant for the implementation of evidence-based practice (EBP) and to investigate leadership conceptualization and operationalization in this field. Design/methodology/approach – A systematic review with narrative synthesis was conducted. Relevant electronic bibliographic databases and reference lists of pertinent review articles were searched. To be included, a study had to involve empirical research and refer to both leadership and EBP in health care. Study quality was assessed with a structured instrument based on study design. Findings – A total of 17 studies were included. Leadership was mostly viewed as a modifier for implementation success, acting through leadership support. Yet, there was definitional imprecision as well as conceptual inconsistency, and studies seemed to inadequately address situational and contextual factors. Although referring to an organizational factor, the concept was mostly analysed at the individual or group level. Research limitations/implications – The concept of leadership in implementation science seems to be not fully developed. It is unclear whether attempts to tap the concept of leadership in available instruments truly capture and measure the full range of the diverse leadership elements at various levels. Research in implementation science would benefit from a better integration of research findings from other disciplinary fields. Once a more mature concept has been established, researchers in implementation science could proceed to further elaborate operationalization and measurement. Originality/value – Although the relevance of leadership in implementation science has been acknowledged, the conceptual base of leadership in this field has received only limited attention.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ucheoma Nwaozuru ◽  
Chisom Obiezu-Umeh ◽  
Thembekile Shato ◽  
Florida Uzoaru ◽  
Stacey Mason ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Advances and proliferation of technologies such as mobile phones may provide opportunities to improve access to HIV/STI services and reach young people with high risk for HIV and STI. However, the reach, uptake, and sustainability of mobile health (mHealth) HIV/STI interventions targeting young people aged 10–24 years in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are largely unknown. To address this gap and to inform implementation science research, a review was conducted to summarize what is known, and what we need to know about implementing mhealth interventions for HIV/STI prevention targeting young people in LMICs. Methods We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for this review. Drawing upon Proctor’s eight implementation outcome measures, we evaluated the acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, cost, feasibility, fidelity, penetration, and sustainability of  m-health HIV/STI interventions targeting young people in LMICs. The search was performed from September 2020–January 2021 and updated on March 1, 2021, in Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PubMed, SCOPUS, Global Health, and Web of Science. Eligible studies were required to include an HIV/STI prevention outcome, target young people aged 10–24 years, include a comparison/control group, and reporting of atleast one implementation outcome as outlined by Proctor. Results A total of 1386 articles were located, and their titles and abstracts were screened. Of these, 57 full-text articles were reviewed and subsequently, and 11 articles representing 6 unique interventions were included in the systematic review. Acceptability 6 (100%), appropriateness 6 (100%), and feasibility 5(83%) were the most frequently evaluated implementation outcomes. Adoption 2 (33%), fidelity 1 (17%), and cost 1 (17%) were rarely reported; penetration and sustainability were not reported. Conclusions This review contributes to implementation science literature by synthesizing key implementation outcomes of mHealth HIV/STI interventions targeting young people in LMICs. Future research is needed on m-health HIV/STI implementation outcomes, particularly the penetration, cost, and long-term sustainability of these interventions. Doing so will enhance the field’s understanding of the mechanisms by which these interventions lead or do not lead to changes in high HIV/STI risk and vulnerability among young people in LMICs.


2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 1351-1358 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Schieren ◽  
Andreas Böhmer ◽  
Fabian Dusse ◽  
Aris Koryllos ◽  
Frank Wappler ◽  
...  

Aquichan ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
Miguel Ángel Fuentealba-Torres ◽  
Zita Lagos Sánchez ◽  
Vilanice Alves de Araújo Püschel ◽  
Denisse Cartagena

Systematic reviews are essential to developing evidence-based nursing practice. The JBI, formerly known as the Joanna Briggs Institute, has contributed significantly to research through technical training on reviews. Cochrane Living Systematic Reviews and Systematic Reviews of Measurement Instruments have been approaches recently used by the scientific community. The purpose of Living Systematic Reviews is to continuously update priority issues, while Systematic Reviews of Measurement Instruments condense evidence on the validity of measurement instruments. This article overviews the JBI Systematic Review approaches and provides critical information about Cochrane Living Systematic Reviews and Systematic Reviews of Measurement Instruments. The use of these new approaches is necessary to maintain the evidence-based nursing practice and advance nursing knowledge.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document