Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37091105›Full record

ArticleImplementation research and practice

A typology of power in implementation: Building on the exploration, preparation, implementation, sustainment (EPIS) framework to advance mental health and HIV health equity.

Megan C Stanton, Samira B Ali, The Sustain Center Team

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation research and practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
8.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Enhancing Impact: A Call to Action for Equitable Implementation Science.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2024
    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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Megan C StantonDepartment of Sociology, Anthropology, Criminology and Social Work, Eastern Connecticut State University, Willimantic, CT, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1098-9233
Samira B AliGraduate College of Social Work, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA.
The Sustain Center TeamSUSTAIN COMPASS Coordinating Center.
Eastern Connecticut State University · USUniversity of Houston · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Persistent inequities in HIV health are due, in part, to barriers to successful HIV-related mental health intervention implementation with marginalized groups. Implementation Science (IS) has begun to examine how the field can promote health equity. Lacking is a clear method to analyze how power is generated and distributed through practical implementation processes and how this power can dismantle and/or reproduce health inequity through intervention implementation. The aims of this paper are to (1) propose a typology of power generated through implementation processes, (2) apply this power typology to expand on the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework to advance HIV and mental health equity and (3) articulate questions to guide the explicit examination and distribution of power throughout implementation. Methods: This paper draws on the work of an Intermediary Purveyor organization implementing trauma-informed care and harm reduction organizational change with HIV service organizations. The expanded framework was developed through analyzing implementation coaching field notes, grant reporting, and evaluation documents, training feedback, partner evaluation interviews, and existing implementation literature. Results: The authors identify three types of power working through implementation; (1) Conclusions: The authors conclude with a set of concrete questions for researchers and practitioners to interrogate power throughout the implementation process. Plain language summary: Over the past few years, Implementation Science researchers have committed increased attention to the ways in which the field can more effectively address health inequity. Lacking is a clear method to analyze how implementation processes themselves generate power that has the potential to contribute to health inequity. In this paper, the authors describe and define three types of power that are created and distributed through intervention implementation; discursive power, epistemic power, and material power. The authors then explain how these forms of power shape factors and phases of implementation, using the well-known EPIS (exploration, preparation, implementation, sustainment) framework. The authors draw from their experience working with and Intermediary Purveyor supporting HIV service organizations implementing trauma-informed care and harm reduction organizational change projects. This paper concludes with a set of critical questions that can be used by researchers and practitioners as a concrete tool to analyze the role of power in intervention implementation processes.

Indexed as

community basedconceptual frameworkdisparitiesequityHIV-AIDSimplementationMental health servicesmultilevel

Identifiers

PMID37091105
PMCPMC9978699
OpenAlexW4206793118

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.