ArticleImplementation science : IS2020
Characterizing evolving frameworks: issues from Esmail et al. (2020) review.
Article in Implementation science : IS, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled 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
- Family Experiences of the Strong Families Program in Thailand: Prospective Mixed Methods Cohort Study.JMIR pediatrics and parenting · 2026Article
- Relevance of learning health systems to physiatrists and its synergy with implementation science: A commentary.PM & R : the journal of injury, function, and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Improving parenting skill through the strong families program in Thailand.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the initial rollout of the physical activity referral standards policy in Scotland: a qualitative study.BMJ open · 2025Article
- The snapshot audit methodology: design, implementation and analysis of prospective observational cohort studies in surgery.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2023Review
- A citation analysis and scoping systematic review of the operationalization of the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM).Implementation science : IS · 2022Article
- A scoping review of frameworks in empirical studies and a review of dissemination frameworks.Implementation science : IS · 2022Article
- Conceptualizing outcomes for use with the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR): the CFIR Outcomes Addendum.Implementation science : IS · 2022Review
- Understanding and applying the RE-AIM framework: Clarifications and resources.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2021Article
- Full Comprehension of Theories, Models, and Frameworks Improves Application: A Focus on RE-AIM.Frontiers in public healthArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Comment on
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There are complex issues in understanding and categorizing implementation science theories, models, and frameworks. Systematic reviews of these models are important undertakings for synthesizing current knowledge. The issues involved are even more challenging when reviewing a large number of frameworks and when some of the frameworks have evolved significantly over time. This paper addresses how the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance) framework was described in the recent Esmail (2020) review and identifies four mischaracterizations. This is followed by a more general discussion of how advances or extensions of frameworks after an original source publication or influential review tend to be overlooked. We discuss why inadvertent mischaracterization of what a framework is and is not, and what it can and cannot be used for, can have deleterious consequences. Finally, we suggest initial ideas about what could be done to prevent or alleviate some of these problems by reviewers, framework developers, and scholars at large.
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.