Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28187747›Full record

ArticleImplementation science : IS2017

Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to produce actionable findings: a rapid-cycle evaluation approach to improving implementation.

Rosalind E Keith, Jesse C Crosson, Ann S O'Malley, DeAnn Cromp, Erin Fries Taylor

5 registry-linked trialsOpen access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science : IS, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 5 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 423 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
423citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
68.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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.

NCT02318108 naunknown statusnot on this map

Redesigning Diabetes Work Processes for Population-Based Primary Care: Supporting Practices to Adopt Registry-Based Care

TypeinterventionalSponsorMathematica Policy Research, Inc.Ran2012 to 2018Enrolled30ConditionsDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2ArmsMentored organizational change, Education only
NCT05429619 completednot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Advancing Peer Support Programming to Address PTSD and Trauma Among Canadian Public Safety Personnel and Veterans

TypeobservationalSponsorMcMaster UniversityRan2023 to 2024Enrolled950ConditionsMental Health Issue, Mental Stress, Post Traumatic Stress DisorderArmsPeerOnCall
NCT05437939 active not recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Identifying Opportunities for Prevention of Adverse Outcomes Following Female Genital

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity of California, San FranciscoRan2022 to 2026Enrolled802ConditionsFemale Genital Fistula, Incontinence
NCT05783297 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Midwest TXTXT Scale up of an Evidence-Based Intervention to Promote HIV Medication Adherence

TypeinterventionalSponsorAmy K. Johnson, PhD, MSWRan2023 to 2025Enrolled210ConditionsHIV InfectionsArmsTreatment Text (TXTXT), Standard of Care
NCT06075108 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

P-KIDs CARE: An Intervention to Address Health Systems Delays to Care for Injured Children in Tanzania

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of UtahRan2024 to 2028Enrolled284ConditionsAccidental Injuries, Global Child Health, Pediatric Emergency Medicine, Public Health System ResearchArmsP-KIDs CARE
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

423 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 736 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Rapid Pre-Implementation Evaluation for Multi-Specialty Surgical Trials: Informing Context-Specific Adaptations.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

363 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rosalind E KeithMathematica Policy Research, PO Box 2393, Princeton, NJ, 08543, USA. RKeith@mathematica-mpr.com.
Jesse C CrossonMathematica Policy Research, PO Box 2393, Princeton, NJ, 08543, USA.
Ann S O'MalleyMathematica Policy Research, 1100 1st Street, NE, 12th Floor, Washington, DC, 20002, USA.
DeAnn CrompGroup Health Research Institute, 1730 Minor Ave. Ste. 1600, Seattle, WA, 98101, USA.
Erin Fries TaylorMathematica Policy Research, 1100 1st Street, NE, 12th Floor, Washington, DC, 20002, USA.
Mathematica Policy Research · USKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute · US

Funding

Redesigning Diabetes Work Processes for Population-Based Primary CareR18DK091810 · NIDDK · MATHEMATICA INC. · PI CROSSON, JESSE C · 2012 to 2016
$3.0M
NIDDK NIH HHS R18 DK091810
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMuch research does not address the practical needs of stakeholders responsible for introducing health care delivery interventions into organizations working to achieve better outcomes. In this article, we present an approach to using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to guide systematic research that supports rapid-cycle evaluation of the implementation of health care delivery interventions and produces actionable evaluation findings intended to improve implementation in a timely manner.

methodsTo present our approach, we describe a formative cross-case qualitative investigation of 21 primary care practices participating in the Comprehensive Primary Care (CPC) initiative, a multi-payer supported primary care practice transformation intervention led by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Qualitative data include observational field notes and semi-structured interviews with primary care practice leadership, clinicians, and administrative and medical support staff. We use intervention-specific codes, and CFIR constructs to reduce and organize the data to support cross-case analysis of patterns of barriers and facilitators relating to different CPC components.

resultsUsing the CFIR to guide data collection, coding, analysis, and reporting of findings supported a systematic, comprehensive, and timely understanding of barriers and facilitators to practice transformation. Our approach to using the CFIR produced actionable findings for improving implementation effectiveness during this initiative and for identifying improvements to implementation strategies for future practice transformation efforts.

conclusionsThe CFIR is a useful tool for guiding rapid-cycle evaluation of the implementation of practice transformation initiatives. Using the approach described here, we systematically identified where adjustments and refinements to the intervention could be made in the second year of the 4-year intervention. We think the approach we describe has broad application and encourage others to use the CFIR, along with intervention-specific codes, to guide the efficient and rigorous analysis of rich qualitative data.

trial registrationNCT02318108.

Indexed as

Research DesignDelivery of Health CareHumansPrimary Health CareQualitative ResearchActionable findingsBarriers and facilitatorsImplementation frameworkPractice transformationPrimary care redesignQualitative methodsRapid-cycle evaluation

Identifiers

PMID28187747
PMCPMC5303301
OpenAlexW2587416630

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.