Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33111242›Full record

ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2021

Scaling Beyond Early Adopters: a Content Analysis of Literature and Key Informant Perspectives.

Isomi Miake-Lye, Selene Mak, Christine A Lam, Anne C Lambert-Kerzner, Deborah Delevan, Tanya Olmos-Ochoa, Paul Shekelle

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Learning from scale-up: a qualitative study of scaling-up interventions for people with multiple long-term conditions in primary care.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2026
    Article
  2. Leveraging artificial intelligence to reduce diagnostic errors in emergency medicine: Challenges, opportunities, and future directions.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2025
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
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

7 authors.

Isomi Miake-LyeVA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, CA, USA. isomi.miake-lye@va.gov.ORCID 0000-0002-8867-1022
Selene MakVA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Christine A LamVA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Anne C Lambert-KerznerUniversity of Colorado Denver, Denver, CO, USA.
Deborah DelevanVA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Tanya Olmos-OchoaVA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Paul ShekelleVA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Funding

VA QUE 15-276VA VA ESP Project #05-226
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInnovations and improvements in care delivery are often not spread across all settings that would benefit from their uptake. Scale-up and spread efforts are deliberate efforts to increase the impact of innovations successfully tested in pilot projects so as to benefit more people. The final stages of scale-up and spread initiatives must contend with reaching hard-to-engage sites.

objectiveTo describe the process of scale-up and spread initiatives, with a focus on hard-to-engage sites and strategies to approach them.

designQualitative content analysis of systematically identified literature and key informant interviews.

participantsLeads from large magnitude scale-up and spread projects. APPROACH: We conducted a systematic literature search on large magnitude scale-up and spread and interviews with eight project leads, who shared their perspectives on strategies to scale-up and spread clinical and administrative practices across healthcare systems, focusing on hard-to-engage sites. We synthesized these data using content analysis. KEY

resultsSearches identified 1919 titles, of which 52 articles were included. Thirty-four discussed general scale-up and spread strategies, 11 described hard-to-engage sites, and 7 discussed strategies for hard-to-engage sites. These included publications were combined with interview findings to describe a fourth phase of the national scale-up and spread process, common challenges for spreading to hard-to-engage sites, and potential benefits of working with hard-to-engage sites, as well as useful strategies for working with hard-to-engage sites.

conclusionsWe identified scant published evidence that describes strategies for reaching hard-to-engage sites. The sparse data we identified aligned with key informant accounts. Future work could focus on better documentation of the later stages of spread efforts, including specific tailoring of approaches and strategies used with hard-to-engage sites. Spread efforts should include a "flexible, tailored approach" for this highly variable group, especially as implementation science is looking to expand its impact in routine care settings.

Indexed as

Health ServicesHealth Services ResearchDelivery of Health CareHumansPilot Projectscontent analysisinterviewslate adoptersliterature synthesisscale-upspread

Identifiers

PMID33111242
PMCPMC7878615

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.