Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31989028›Full record

ArticleLearning health systems2020

CFIR simplified: Pragmatic application of and adaptations to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) for evaluation of a patient-centered care transformation within a learning health system.

Nadia Safaeinili, Cati Brown-Johnson, Jonathan G Shaw, Megan Mahoney, Marcy Winget

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Learning health systems, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 136 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
136citing papers in PubMed, 8 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

136 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

76 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.

Nadia SafaeiniliDivision of Primary Care and Population Health Stanford University School of Medicine Palo Alto California.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4792-3091
Cati Brown-JohnsonDivision of Primary Care and Population Health Stanford University School of Medicine Palo Alto California.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5415-3665
Jonathan G ShawDivision of Primary Care and Population Health Stanford University School of Medicine Palo Alto California.
Megan MahoneyDivision of Primary Care and Population Health Stanford University School of Medicine Palo Alto California.
Marcy WingetDivision of Primary Care and Population Health Stanford University School of Medicine Palo Alto California.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5893-280X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) is a commonly used implementation science framework to facilitate design, evaluation, and implementation of evidence-based interventions. Its comprehensiveness is an asset for considering facilitators and barriers to implementation and also makes the framework cumbersome to use. We describe adaptations we made to CFIR to simplify its pragmatic application, for use in a learning health system context, in the evaluation of a complex patient-centered care transformation.

methodsWe conducted a qualitative study and structured our evaluation questions, data collection methods, analysis, and reporting around CFIR. We collected qualitative data via semi-structured interviews and observations with key stakeholders throughout. We identified and documented adaptations to CFIR throughout the evaluation process.

resultsWe analyzed semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders (n = 23) from clinical observations (n = 5). We made three key adaptations to CFIR: (a) promoted "patient needs and resources," a subconstruct of the outer setting, to its own domain within CFIR during data analysis; (b) divided the "inner setting" domain into three layers that account for the hierarchy of health care systems (i. pilot clinic, ii. peer clinics, and iii. overarching health care system); and (c) tailored several construct definitions to fit a patient-centered, primary care setting. Analysis yielded qualitative findings concentrated in the CFIR domains "intervention characteristics" and "outer setting," with a robust number of findings in the new domain "patient needs and resources."

conclusionsTo make CFIR more accessible and relevant for wider use in the context of patient-centered care transformations within a learning health system, a few adaptations are key. Specifically, we found success by teasing apart interactions across the inner layers of a health system, tailoring construct definitions, and placing additional focus on patient needs.

Indexed as

CFIRevaluationlearning health systempatient‐centered careprimary caretransformation

Identifiers

PMID31989028
PMCPMC6971122

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.