Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32998752›Full record

ReviewHealth research policy and systems2020

A narrative review of economic constructs in commonly used implementation and scale-up theories, frameworks and models.

Brown Vicki, Tran Huong, Blake Miranda, Laws Rachel, Moodie Marj

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Health research policy and systems, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Tensions and Paradoxes of Scaling Up: A Critical Reflection on Physical Activity Promotion.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Brown VickiDeakin Health Economics, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, 3220, Australia. victoria.brown@deakin.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2891-9476
Tran HuongDeakin Health Economics, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, 3220, Australia.
Blake MirandaGlobal Obesity Centre, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, 3220, Australia.
Laws RachelInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, Deakin University, Geelong, 3220, Australia.
Moodie MarjDeakin Health Economics, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, 3220, Australia.

Funding

Deakin University 2019-SRG006Deakin University Alfred Deakin Postdoctoral Research FellowshipDeakin University Institute for Health Transformation Postdoctoral Fellowship
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTranslating research evidence into practice is challenging and, to date, there are relatively few public health interventions that have been effectively and cost-effectively implemented and delivered at scale. Theories, models and frameworks (herein termed 'frameworks') have been used in implementation science to describe, guide and explain implementation and scale-up. While economic constructs have been reported as both barriers and facilitators to effective implementation and scale-up of public health interventions, there is currently no published review of how economic constructs are considered within commonly used implementation and scale-up frameworks. This paper aimed to narratively review the economic constructs incorporated in commonly used implementation and scale-up frameworks.

methodsFrameworks for inclusion in the narrative review were identified from the literature and thematic content analysis was undertaken using a recursive deductive approach. Emergent key themes and sub-themes were identified and results were summarised narratively within each theme.

resultsTwenty-six framework publications were included in our analysis, with wide variation between frameworks in the scope and level of detail of the economic constructs included. Four key themes emerged from the data - 'resources', 'benefit', 'cost' and 'funding'. Only five frameworks incorporated all four identified key themes. Overarching lenses from which to consider key themes included 'stakeholder perspectives', 'stage in the research translation process' and 'context'. 'Resources' were most frequently considered in relation to the sub-themes of 'types of resources' (e.g. labour, time or infrastructure) and 'availability' of resources, and the opportunity for 'economies of scale'. The 'relative advantage of interventions' emerged as an interconnecting sub-theme between 'cost' and 'benefit'. 'Funding' was most often considered in relation to 'funding sources', 'availability', 'sustainability' or 'contextual impact'. The concept of 'opportunity cost' was considered in relatively few frameworks, despite being fundamental to economic theory.

conclusionsImplementation and scale-up frameworks provide a conceptual map to inform the effective and cost-effective implementation of public health interventions delivered at scale. Despite evidence of an emerging focus on the economic considerations of implementation and scale-up within some commonly used frameworks, our findings suggest that there is significant scope for further exploration of the economic constructs related to implementation and scale-up.

Indexed as

Implementation ScienceCost-Benefit AnalysiseconomicframeworksImplementationmodelsscale-uptheories

Identifiers

PMID32998752
PMCPMC7528255

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.