ArticleAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2007
Evaluating implementation fidelity in health information technology interventions.
Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Web 2.0 chronic disease self-management for older adults: a systematic review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2013Pooled it
- Reporting quality of social and psychological intervention trials: a systematic review of reporting guidelines and trial publications.PloS one · 2013Pooled it
- PROTOCOL: Water, sanitation and hygiene for reducing childhood mortality in low- and middle-income countries.Campbell systematic reviews · 2021Article
- Implementation Tells Us More Beyond Pooled Estimates: Secondary Analysis of a Multicountry mHealth Trial to Reduce Blood Pressure.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2018Article
- Development, inter-rater reliability and feasibility of a checklist to assess implementation (Ch-IMP) in systematic reviews: the case of provider-based prevention and treatment programs targeting children and youth.BMC medical research methodology · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Health information technology evaluators need to distinguish between intervention efficacy as assessed in the ideal circumstances of clinical trials and intervention effectiveness as assessed in the real world circumstances of actual practice. Because current evaluation study designs do not routinely allow for this distinction, we have developed a framework for evaluation of implementation fidelity that considers health information technologies as complex interventions and makes use of common intervention components as defined in the Oxford Implementation Index. We also propose statistical methods for the evaluation of interventions at the system and component level using the Rubin Causal Model. We then describe how to apply this framework to evaluate an ongoing clinical trial of three health information technology interventions currently implemented in a 17,000 patient community-based health network caring for Medicaid beneficiaries in Durham County, North Carolina.
Indexed as
Identifiers
18693828PMC2655857What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.