Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26003785›Full record

ArticleImplementation science : IS2015

Developing a targeted, theory-informed implementation intervention using two theoretical frameworks to address health professional and organisational factors: a case study to improve the management of mild traumatic brain injury in the emergency department.

Emma J Tavender, Marije Bosch, Russell L Gruen, Sally E Green, Susan Michie, Sue E Brennan, Jill J Francis, Jennie L Ponsford, Jonathan C Knott, Sue Meares and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science : IS, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

38 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Tailored interventions to address determinants of practice.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Emma J TavenderNational Trauma Research Institute, The Alfred, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. emma.tavender@monash.edu.
Marije BoschNational Trauma Research Institute, The Alfred, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. marije.bosch@monash.edu.
Russell L GruenNational Trauma Research Institute, The Alfred, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. r.gruen@alfred.org.au.
Sally E GreenSchool of Public Health and Preventative Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. sally.green@monash.edu.
Susan MichieDepartment of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, UK. s.michie@ucl.ac.uk.
Sue E BrennanSchool of Public Health and Preventative Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. sue.brennan@monash.edu.
Jill J FrancisSchool of Health Sciences, City University London, London, UK. jill.francis.1@city.ac.uk.
Jennie L PonsfordNational Trauma Research Institute, The Alfred, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. jennie.ponsford@monash.edu.
Jonathan C KnottMelbourne Medical School, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia. jonathan.knott@mh.org.au.
Sue MearesDepartment of Psychology, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia. sue.meares@mq.edu.au.
Tracy SmythEmergency Department, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, Australia. tracey.smyth@health.nsw.gov.au.
Denise A O'ConnorSchool of Public Health and Preventative Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. denise.oconnor@monash.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite the availability of evidence-based guidelines for the management of mild traumatic brain injury in the emergency department (ED), variations in practice exist. Interventions designed to implement recommended behaviours can reduce this variation. Using theory to inform intervention development is advocated; however, there is no consensus on how to select or apply theory. Integrative theoretical frameworks, based on syntheses of theories and theoretical constructs relevant to implementation, have the potential to assist in the intervention development process. This paper describes the process of applying two theoretical frameworks to investigate the factors influencing recommended behaviours and the choice of behaviour change techniques and modes of delivery for an implementation intervention.

methodsA stepped approach was followed: (i) identification of locally applicable and actionable evidence-based recommendations as targets for change, (ii) selection and use of two theoretical frameworks for identifying barriers to and enablers of change (Theoretical Domains Framework and Model of Diffusion of Innovations in Service Organisations) and (iii) identification and operationalisation of intervention components (behaviour change techniques and modes of delivery) to address the barriers and enhance the enablers, informed by theory, evidence and feasibility/acceptability considerations. We illustrate this process in relation to one recommendation, prospective assessment of post-traumatic amnesia (PTA) by ED staff using a validated tool.

resultsFour recommendations for managing mild traumatic brain injury were targeted with the intervention. The intervention targeting the PTA recommendation consisted of 14 behaviour change techniques and addressed 6 theoretical domains and 5 organisational domains. The mode of delivery was informed by six Cochrane reviews. It was delivered via five intervention components : (i) local stakeholder meetings, (ii) identification of local opinion leader teams, (iii) a train-the-trainer workshop for appointed local opinion leaders, (iv) local training workshops for delivery by trained local opinion leaders and (v) provision of tools and materials to prompt recommended behaviours.

conclusionsTwo theoretical frameworks were used in a complementary manner to inform intervention development in managing mild traumatic brain injury in the ED. The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the developed intervention is being evaluated in a cluster randomised trial, part of the Neurotrauma Evidence Translation (NET) program.

Indexed as

Practice Guidelines as TopicBrain InjuriesEmergency Service, HospitalEnvironmentEvidence-Based MedicineHumansModels, TheoreticalOrganizational InnovationProspective StudiesQuality Improvement

Identifiers

PMID26003785
PMCPMC4446082

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.