Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28371050›Full record

ArticleJournal of evaluation in clinical practice2018

The struggle of translating science into action: Foundational concepts of implementation science.

Frances Rapport, Robyn Clay-Williams, Kate Churruca, Patti Shih, Anne Hogden, Jeffrey Braithwaite

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 148 papers, 13 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
148citing papers in PubMed, 13 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

148 citing papers in PubMed, 13 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Exploring disparities in adherence to colorectal cancer clinical practice guidelines and associated survival outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Implementation science in care for older adults across healthcare settings: a scoping review.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2026
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

88 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

6 authors.

Frances RapportCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4428-2826
Robyn Clay-WilliamsCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Australia.
Kate ChurrucaCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Australia.
Patti ShihCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Australia.
Anne HogdenCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Australia.
Jeffrey BraithwaiteCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

RATIONALE, AIMS, AND

objectives"Implementation science," the scientific study of methods translating research findings into practical, useful outcomes, is contested and complex, with unpredictable use of results from routine clinical practice and different levels of continuing assessment of implementable interventions. The authors aim to reveal how implementation science is presented and understood in health services research contexts and clarify the foundational concepts: diffusion, dissemination, implementation, adoption, and sustainability, to progress knowledge in the field.

methodImplementation science models, theories, and frameworks are critiqued, and their value for laying the groundwork from which to implement a study's findings is emphasised. The paper highlights the challenges of turning research findings into practical outcomes that can be successfully implemented and the need for support from change agents, to ensure improvements to health care provision, health systems, and policy. The paper examines how researchers create implementation plans and what needs to be considered for study outputs to lead to sustainable interventions. This aspect needs clear planning, underpinned by appropriate theoretical paradigms that rigorously respond to a study's aims and objectives.

conclusionResearchers might benefit from a return to first principles in implementation science, whereby applications that result from research endeavours are both effective and readily disseminated and where interventions can be supported by appropriate health care personnel. These should be people specifically identified to promote change in service organisation, delivery, and policy that can be systematically evaluated over time, to ensure high-quality, long-term improvements to patients' health.

Indexed as

Diffusion of InnovationHealth Services ResearchEvidence-Based PracticeHealth Plan ImplementationHumansInformation DisseminationPractice Patterns, Physicians'Quality ImprovementTranslational Research, Biomedicalevidence-based health care and policyhealth services researchimplementable research findingsimplementation science

Identifiers

PMID28371050
PMCPMC5901403

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.