Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32854718›Full record

ReviewImplementation science : IS2020

The use of the PARIHS framework in implementation research and practice-a citation analysis of the literature.

Anna Bergström, Anna Ehrenberg, Ann Catrine Eldh, Ian D Graham, Kazuko Gustafsson, Gillian Harvey, Sarah Hunter, Alison Kitson, Jo Rycroft-Malone, Lars Wallin

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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 71 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
71citing papers in PubMed
–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

71 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Use of the i-PARIHS framework in nutrition and dietetics research and practice: A citation analysis of the literature and case studies.Nutrition in clinical practice : official publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition · 2025
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

11 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

10 authors.

Anna BergströmDepartment of Women's and Children's health, Uppsala Global Health Research on Implementation and Sustainability (UGHRIS), Uppsala, Sweden. anna.bergstrom@kbh.uu.se.ORCID 0000-0003-4084-2336
Anna EhrenbergSchool of Education, Health, and Social Studies, Dalarna University, Falun, Sweden.
Ann Catrine EldhDepartment of Medicine and Health, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Ian D GrahamSchool of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.
Kazuko GustafssonSchool of Education, Health, and Social Studies, Dalarna University, Falun, Sweden.
Gillian HarveyAdelaide Nursing School, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia.
Sarah HunterCaring Futures Institute, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia.
Alison KitsonCaring Futures Institute, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia.
Jo Rycroft-MaloneDivision of Health Research, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancashire, UK.
Lars WallinSchool of Education, Health, and Social Studies, Dalarna University, Falun, Sweden.

Funding

CIHR FDN #143237
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) framework was developed two decades ago and conceptualizes successful implementation (SI) as a function (f) of the evidence (E) nature and type, context (C) quality, and the facilitation (F), [SI = f (E,C,F)]. Despite a growing number of citations of theoretical frameworks including PARIHS, details of how theoretical frameworks are used remains largely unknown. This review aimed to enhance the understanding of the breadth and depth of the use of the PARIHS framework.

methodsThis citation analysis commenced from four core articles representing the key stages of the framework's development. The citation search was performed in Web of Science and Scopus. After exclusion, we undertook an initial assessment aimed to identify articles using PARIHS and not only referencing any of the core articles. To assess this, all articles were read in full. Further data extraction included capturing information about where (country/countries and setting/s) PARIHS had been used, as well as categorizing how the framework was applied. Also, strengths and weaknesses, as well as efforts to validate the framework, were explored in detail.

resultsThe citation search yielded 1613 articles. After applying exclusion criteria, 1475 articles were read in full, and the initial assessment yielded a total of 367 articles reported to have used the PARIHS framework. These articles were included for data extraction. The framework had been used in a variety of settings and in both high-, middle-, and low-income countries. With regard to types of use, 32% used PARIHS in planning and delivering an intervention, 50% in data analysis, 55% in the evaluation of study findings, and/or 37% in any other way. Further analysis showed that its actual application was frequently partial and generally not well elaborated.

conclusionsIn line with previous citation analysis of the use of theoretical frameworks in implementation science, we also found a rather superficial description of the use of PARIHS. Thus, we propose the development and adoption of reporting guidelines on how framework(s) are used in implementation studies, with the expectation that this will enhance the maturity of implementation science.

Indexed as

Health Services ResearchImplementation ScienceHealth ServicesCitation analysisImplementation scienceKnowledge translationPARIHS framework

Identifiers

PMID32854718
PMCPMC7450685

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.