Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31488332›Full record

ReviewPsychiatry research2020

Getting a clinical innovation into practice: An introduction to implementation strategies.

JoAnn E Kirchner, Jeffrey L Smith, Byron J Powell, Thomas J Waltz, Enola K Proctor

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Psychiatry research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 142 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
142citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

142 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  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. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

82 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.

JoAnn E KirchnerDepartment of Veterans Affairs Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI) for Team-Based Behavioral Health, Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System, North Little Rock, AR, United States; Psychiatric Research Institute, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, United States. Electronic address: joann.kirchner@va.gov.
Jeffrey L SmithDepartment of Veterans Affairs Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI) for Team-Based Behavioral Health, Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System, North Little Rock, AR, United States; Psychiatric Research Institute, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, United States.
Byron J PowellUniversity of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, United States.
Thomas J WaltzDepartment of Psychology, Eastern Michigan University, Ypsilanti, MI, United States; The VA Center for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.
Enola K ProctorBrown School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, United States.

Funding

Washington University Implementation Science Center for Cancer Control (WU-ISCCC)P50CA244431 · NCI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI COLDITZ, GRAHAM A. · 2019 to 2023
$8.0M
IMPROVING THE IMPLEMENTATION AND SUSTAINMENT OF EBPS IN MENTAL HEALTH: DEVELOPING AND PILOTING THE COLLABORATIVE ORGANIZATIONAL APPROACH TO SELECTING AND TAILORING IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES (COAST-ISK01MH113806 · NIMH · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI POWELL, BYRON JAMES · 2017 to 2020
$697k
NCI NIH HHS P50 CA244431NIMH NIH HHS K01 MH113806
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Just as there is a robust science that supports development and rigorous testing of clinical innovations, the emerging field of implementation science is developing new theory-based knowledge regarding a growing portfolio of meticulously tested implementation strategies that seek to improve uptake of evidence-based practices by targeting barriers at multiple levels within health care settings. Studying and documenting implementation strategies associated with uptake during the development and trial of a clinical innovation could subsequently position the researcher for a more seamless transition and handoff of the innovation to clinical and operational leaders. The objective of this manuscript is to introduce the concept of implementation strategies: what they are; the rigor with which they are defined and applied to address barriers to clinical innovation adoption; how strategy selection may vary based on contextual, innovation, and recipient factors; how to document the application of strategies over the course of an implementation study; and how testing their effectiveness is the focus of implementation research trials.

Indexed as

Implementation ScienceEvidence-Based PracticeHumansTherapies, InvestigationalUnited StatesUnited States Department of Veterans Affairs

Identifiers

PMID31488332
PMCPMC7239693

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.