Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37475088›Full record

ArticleImplementation science : IS2023

Aligning intuition and theory: a novel approach to identifying the determinants of behaviours necessary to support implementation of evidence into practice.

Natalie Taylor, Skye McKay, Janet C Long, Clara Gaff, Kathryn North, Jeffrey Braithwaite, Jill J Francis, Stephanie Best

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science : IS, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
10.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Natalie TaylorSchool of Population Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, UNSW Sydney, High Street Kensington, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia. natalie.taylor@unsw.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-0280-0883
Skye McKaySchool of Population Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, UNSW Sydney, High Street Kensington, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia.
Janet C LongAustralian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
Clara GaffMelbourne Genomics Health Alliance, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Kathryn NorthAustralian Genomics, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.
Jeffrey BraithwaiteAustralian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
Jill J FrancisSchool of Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Stephanie BestAustralian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
Macquarie University · AURoyal Children's Hospital · AUThe University of Melbourne · AUUNSW Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDisentangling the interplay between experience-based intuition and theory-informed implementation is crucial for identifying the direct contribution theory can make for generating behaviour changes needed for successful evidence translation. In the context of 'clinicogenomics', a complex and rapidly evolving field demanding swift practice change, we aimed to (a) describe a combined clinician intuition- and theory-driven method for identifying determinants of and strategies for implementing clinicogenomics, and (b) articulate a structured approach to standardise hypothesised behavioural pathways and make potential underlying theory explicit.

methodsInterview data from 16 non-genetic medical specialists using genomics in practice identified three target behaviour areas across the testing process: (1) identifying patients, (2) test ordering and reporting, (3) communicating results. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) was used to group barriers and facilitators to performing these actions. Barriers were grouped by distinct TDF domains, with 'overarching' TDF themes identified for overlapping barriers. Clinician intuitively-derived implementation strategies were matched with corresponding barriers, and retrospectively coded against behaviour change techniques (BCTs). Where no intuitive strategies were provided, theory-driven strategies were generated. An algorithm was developed and applied to articulate how implementation strategies address barriers to influence behaviour change.

resultsAcross all target behaviour areas, 32 identified barriers were coded across seven distinct TDF domains and eight overarching TDF themes. Within the 29 intuitive strategies, 21 BCTs were represented and used on 49 occasions to address 23 barriers. On 10 (20%) of these occasions, existing empirical links were found between BCTs and corresponding distinct TDF-coded barriers. Twenty additional theory-driven implementation strategies (using 19 BCTs on 31 occasions) were developed to address nine remaining barriers.

conclusionClinicians naturally generate their own solutions when implementing clinical interventions, and in this clinicogenomics example these intuitive strategies aligned with theoretical recommendations 20% of the time. We have matched intuitive strategies with theory-driven BCTs to make potential underlying theory explicit through proposed structured hypothesised causal pathways. Transparency and efficiency are enhanced, providing a novel method to identify determinants of implementation. Operationalising this approach to support the design of implementation strategies may optimise practice change in response to rapidly evolving scientific advances requiring swift translation into healthcare.

Indexed as

Behavior TherapyIntuitionHumansRetrospective StudiesAlgorithmClinical genomicsClinical practice changeImplementation scienceMechanism of action

Identifiers

PMID37475088
PMCPMC10360252
OpenAlexW4384926096

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.