Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35410434›Full record

ArticleImplementation science communications2022

Using economic evaluations in implementation science to increase transparency in costs and outcomes for organizational decision-makers.

Lisa Saldana, Debra P Ritzwoller, Mark Campbell, Eryn Piper Block

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science communications, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

46 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

Lisa SaldanaOregon Social Learning Center, Eugene, OR, USA. lisas@oslc.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0792-6290
Debra P RitzwollerInstitute for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Colorado, Denver, USA.
Mark CampbellOregon Social Learning Center, Eugene, OR, USA.
Eryn Piper BlockOregon Social Learning Center, Eugene, OR, USA.

Funding

NRSA Training CoreTL1TR001883 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI ALEX BUI, Nina Thawata Harawa · 2016 to 2026
$8.6M
Community Development Teams to Scale-Up MTFC in CaliforniaR01MH076158 · NIMH · CENTER FOR RESEARCH TO PRACTICE, INC. · PI CHAMBERLAIN, PATRICIA · 2006 to 2011
$5.7M
Pragmatic Implementation Science Approaches to Assess and Enhance Value of Cancer Prevention and Control in Rural Primary CareP50CA244688 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI GLASGOW, RUSSELL E · 2019 to 2023
$4.9M
Facilitating Sustainment Through Implementation Feedback: The SIC Coaching ModelR01DA044745 · NIDA · OREGON SOCIAL LEARNING CENTER, INC. · PI SALDANA, LISA · 2018 to 2022
$3.8M
NCATS NIH HHS TL1 TR001883NCI NIH HHS P50 CA244688NCI NIH HHS P50 CA244688-02NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA044745NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH076158NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH076158-05S1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEconomic evaluations frequently are utilized to compare the value of different interventions in medicine and health in concrete terms. Implementation science also would benefit from the incorporation of economic evaluations, but such studies are rare in the literature. The National Cancer Institute has supported a special collection of articles focusing on economic evaluations in implementation science. Even when interventions are supported by substantial evidence, they are implemented infrequently in the field. Implementation costs are important determinants for whether organizational decision-makers choose to adopt an intervention and whether the implementation process is successful. Economic evaluations, such as cost-effectiveness analyses, can help organizational decision-makers choose between implementation approaches for evidence-based interventions by accounting for costs and succinctly presenting cost/benefit tradeoffs. MAIN TEXT: This manuscript presents a discussion of important considerations for incorporating economic evaluations into implementation science. First, the distinction between intervention and implementation costs is presented, along with an explanation of why the comprehensive representation of implementation costs is elusive. Then, the manuscript describes how economic evaluations in implementation science may differ from those in medicine and health intervention studies, especially in terms of determining the perspectives and outcomes of interest. Finally, referencing a scale-up trial of an evidence-based behavioral health intervention, concrete case examples of how cost data can be collected and used in economic evaluations targeting implementation, rather than clinical outcomes, are described.

conclusionsBy gaining a greater understanding of the costs and economic impact associated with different implementation approaches, organizational decision-makers will have better transparency for future replication and scale-up. The use of economic evaluations can help to advance this understanding and provide researchers, purveyors or third-party intermediaries, and organizational decision-makers with essential information to facilitate implementation.

Indexed as

COINSCost-effectivenessDecision-makersEconomic evaluationImplementation costResourcesStages of Implementation Completion

Identifiers

PMID35410434
PMCPMC9004101

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.