ArticleBMC health services research2019
Measuring implementation: development of the implementation process assessment tool (IPAT).
Article in BMC health services research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03271242 (A Pairwise Randomized Study on Implementation of Guidelines and Evidence Based Treatments of Psychoses), which is not on this map. Cited by 14 papers.
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.
A Pairwise Randomized Study on Implementation of Guidelines and Evidence Based Treatments of Psychoses
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sustainment of Four Evidence-Based Treatments for Patients with Psychosis: A Prospective Cohort Study in Norway.Administration and policy in mental health · 2026Trial
- A secondary exploratory study of associations between patient- and clinician-reported clinical outcomes and fidelity for four evidence-based psychosis treatments.BMC psychiatry · 2025Trial
- Can systematic implementation support improve programme fidelity by improving care providers' perceptions of implementation factors? A cluster randomized trial.BMC health services research · 2022Trial
- The Effect of Intensive Implementation Support on Fidelity for Four Evidence-Based Psychosis Treatments: A Cluster Randomized Trial.Administration and policy in mental health · 2021Trial
- Article
- Rapid response systems, antibiotic stewardship and medication reconciliation: a scoping review on implementation factors, activities and outcomes.BMJ quality & safety · 2025Article
- The Implementation Process Assessment Tool: translation, contextualization, and psychometric evaluation of a Swedish version in a municipal elderly care context.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- A scoping review of implementation science theories, models, and frameworks - an appraisal of purpose, characteristics, usability, applicability, and testability.Implementation science : IS · 2023Article
- Measurement of and training for NCD guideline implementation in LMICs: a scoping review protocol.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Exploring the intersection of hermeneutics and implementation: a scoping review.Systematic reviews · 2023Article
- Making shouldBMJ open · 2022Article
- Development and initial cognitive testing of the Digital Equity Screening Tool (DEST): Community participatory approach to assessing digital inequality.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2022Article
- Implementation-as-Usual in Community-Based Organizations Providing Specialized Services to Individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Mixed Methods Study.Administration and policy in mental health · 2021Article
- Unintended consequences: a qualitative study exploring the impact of collecting implementation process data with phone interviews on implementation activities.Implementation science communications · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundImplementation science comprises a large set of theories suggesting interacting factors at different organisational levels. Development of literature syntheses and frameworks for implementation have contributed to comprehensive descriptions of implementation. However, corresponding instruments for measuring these comprehensive descriptions are currently lacking. The present study aimed to develop an instrument measuring care providers' perceptions of an implementation effort, and to explore the instrument's psychometric properties.
methodsBased on existing implementation literature, a questionnaire was designed with items on individual and team factors and on stages of change in an implementation process. The instrument was tested in a Norwegian study on implementation of evidence based practices for psychosis. Item analysis, factor structure, and internal consistency at baseline were examined.
resultsThe 27-item Implementation Process Assessment Tool (IPAT) revealed large variation between mean score of the items. The total scale scores were widely dispersed across respondents. Internal consistency for the total scale was high (Cronbach's alpha: .962), and all but one item contributed positively to the construct. The results indicated four underlying constructs: individual stages for behavioural change, individual activities and perceived support, collective readiness and support, and individual perceptions of the intervention.
conclusionsThe IPAT appears to be a feasible instrument for investigating the implementation process from the perspective of those making the change. It can enable examination of the relative importance of factors thought to be essential for implementation outcomes. It may also provide ongoing feedback for leaders tailoring support for teams to improve implementation. However, further research is needed to detect the instrument's properties later in the implementation process and in different contexts.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov code NCT03271242 (retrospective registered September 5, 2017).
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.