Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35037884›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2022

A Self-help Tool to Facilitate Implementation of eHealth Initiatives in Health Care (E-Ready): Formative Evaluation.

Petra Dannapfel, Kristin Thomas, Alexander Chakhunashvili, Jeanette Melin, Ylva Trolle Lagerros

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

5 authors.

Petra DannapfelDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3277-0590
Kristin ThomasDepartment of Health, Medicine and Caring, Medical Faculty, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6434-4855
Alexander ChakhunashviliKarolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2616-8093
Jeanette MelinResearch Institutes of Sweden, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3700-3921
Ylva Trolle LagerrosClinical Epidemiology Division, Department of Medicine, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6816-7577

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundeHealth interventions have the potential to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of health care. However, research has shown that implementing eHealth in routine health care practice is difficult. Organizational readiness to change has been shown to be central to successful implementation. This paper describes the development and formative evaluation of a generic self-help tool, E-Ready, designed to be used by managers, project leaders, or others responsible for implementation in a broad range of health care settings.

objectiveThe aim of this study is to develop and evaluate a tool that could facilitate eHealth implementation in, for example, health care.

methodsA first version of the tool was generated based on implementation theory (E-Ready 1.0). A formative evaluation was undertaken through expert panels (n=15), cognitive interviews (n=17), and assessment of measurement properties on E-Ready items from 3 different workplaces (n=165) using Rasch analyses. E-Ready 1.0 was also field tested among the target population (n=29). Iterative revisions were conducted during the formative evaluation process, and E-Ready 2.0 was generated.

resultsThe E-Ready Tool consists of a readiness assessment survey and a hands-on manual. The survey measures perceived readiness for change (willingness and capability) at individual and collective levels: perceived conditions for change at the workplace, perceived individual conditions for change, perceived support and engagement among management, perceived readiness among colleagues, perceived consequences on status quo, and perceived workplace attitudes. The manual contains a brief introduction, instructions on how to use the tool, information on the themes of E-Ready, instructions on how to create an implementation plan, brief advice for success, and tips for further reading on implementation theory. Rasch analyses showed overall acceptable measurement properties in terms of fit validity. The subscale Individual conditions for change (3 items) had the lowest person reliability (0.56), whereas Perceived consequences on status quo (5 items) had the highest person reliability (0.87).

conclusionsE-Ready 2.0 is a new self-help tool to guide implementation targeting health care provider readiness and engagement readiness ahead of eHealth initiatives in, for example, health care settings. E-Ready can be improved further to capture additional aspects of implementation; improvements can also be made by evaluating the tool in a larger sample.

Indexed as

health care sectorimplementation scienceorganizational readiness for changetelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID35037884
PMCPMC8804954

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.