ArticleImplementation science : IS2018
T-CaST: an implementation theory comparison and selection tool.
Article in Implementation science : IS, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 83 papers, 3 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
83 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- How well do critical care audit and feedback interventions adhere to best practice? Development and application of the REFLECT-52 evaluation tool.Implementation science : IS · 2021Pooled it
- Evaluating the Application of the RE-AIM Planning and Evaluation Framework: An Updated Systematic Review and Exploration of Pragmatic Application.Frontiers in public health · 2021Pooled it
- Systematic review of the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework.Implementation science : IS · 2019Pooled it
- A qualitative analysis to identify implementation strategies for a deprescribing clinical practice guideline using the CFIR-ERIC Matching Tool: perspectives from consumers and professional stakeholders.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2026Article
- Theories, models, and frameworks in implementation science in the context of rehabilitation research: a scoping review.Journal of rehabilitation medicine · 2026Article
- Development and preliminary evaluation of the Implementation Research Proposal Appraisal Criteria (ImpResPAC) tool: an international expert modified e-Delphi study.Implementation science communications · 2026Article
- Exploring the barriers and facilitators of implementing family-focused child development programmes in real-world settings: a scoping review.BMJ paediatrics open · 2026Article
- Implementation priorities in Australian community pharmacy: A semi-structured survey of Australian pharmacists.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2026Article
- Facilitators and challenges to implementing a researcher-in-residence model to build research capacity in adult social care.Health research policy and systems · 2026Article
- Stakeholder engagement as a valuable tool to improve the relevance of research regarding framework development.npj veterinary sciences · 2026Article
- How leaders in mental health services shape workforce training outcomes: goals, actions, and mechanisms of change.Frontiers in health services · 2026Article
- Hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation studies: why and how to do them.Frontiers in health services · 2026Article
- Implementation research in Primary Care (Part 2): How to conduct implementation research?Malaysian family physician : the official journal of the Academy of Family Physicians of Malaysia · 2026Review
- Dissemination and Implementation Theories, Models, or Frameworks Utilized in International Aging Research: A Citation Analysis.Global implementation research and applications · 2026Review
- Using implementation science to promote evidence-based nutritional care in healthcare settings: A mixed-methods systematic review.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2025Review
- Assessing what matters most in older emergency department patients.Age and ageing · 2025Observational
- Advancing the Field of Deimplementation: Perspectives on Low-Value Clinical Preventive Services.AJPM focus · 2025Article
- Improving Wound Care in Residential Aged Care Facilities: Development, Validation and Use of a Novel Knowledge Translation Framework.International journal of older people nursing · 2025Article
- Using Mixed Methods to Evaluate Risk Minimisation Programs in Europe and the USA: An Innovative Blueprint.Drug safety · 2025Article
- The implementation of reusable drapes and gowns in operating theatres: A mixed-methods analysis of data from 5230 peri-operative professionals in 134 countries.Implementation science communications · 2025Article
23 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTheories, models, and frameworks (TMF) are foundational for generalizing implementation efforts and research findings. However, TMF and the criteria used to select them are not often described in published articles, perhaps due in part to the challenge of selecting from among the many TMF that exist in the field. The objective of this international study was to develop a user-friendly tool to help scientists and practitioners select appropriate TMF to guide their implementation projects.
methodsImplementation scientists across the USA, the UK, and Canada identified and rated conceptually distinct categories of criteria in a concept mapping exercise. We then used the concept mapping results to develop a tool to help users select appropriate TMF for their projects. We assessed the tool's usefulness through expert consensus and cognitive and semi-structured interviews with implementation scientists.
resultsThirty-seven implementation scientists (19 researchers and 18 practitioners) identified four criteria domains: usability, testability, applicability, and familiarity. We then developed a prototype of the tool that included a list of 25 criteria organized by domain, definitions of the criteria, and a case example illustrating an application of the tool. Results of cognitive and semi-structured interviews highlighted the need for the tool to (1) be as succinct as possible; (2) have separate versions to meet the unique needs of researchers versus practitioners; (3) include easily understood terms; (4) include an introduction that clearly describes the tool's purpose and benefits; (5) provide space for noting project information, comparing and scoring TMF, and accommodating contributions from multiple team members; and (6) include more case examples illustrating its application. Interview participants agreed that the tool (1) offered them a way to select from among candidate TMF, (2) helped them be explicit about the criteria that they used to select a TMF, and (3) enabled them to compare, select from among, and/or consider the usefulness of combining multiple TMF. These revisions resulted in the Theory Comparison and Selection Tool (T-CaST), a paper and web-enabled tool that includes 16 specific criteria that can be used to consider and justify the selection of TMF for a given project. Criteria are organized within four categories: applicability, usability, testability, and acceptability.
conclusionsT-CaST is a user-friendly tool to help scientists and practitioners select appropriate TMF to guide implementation projects. Additionally, T-CaST has the potential to promote transparent reporting of criteria used to select TMF within and beyond the field of implementation science.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.