Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38033094›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Improving the pragmatic usefulness of the scoring matrix for the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). A proposal for a more frequency-based approach: The CFIR-f.

George Economidis, Anne-Marie Eades, Anthony Shakeshaft, Sara Farnbach

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

George EconomidisFaculty of Medicine, National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8035-2759
Anne-Marie EadesFaculty of Health Sciences, Curtin School of Allied Health, Curtin University, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
Anthony ShakeshaftFaculty of Medicine, National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Sara FarnbachFaculty of Medicine, National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7013-1079
UNSW Sydney · AUCurtin University · AUThe University of Queensland · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) is a well-established framework for systematically identifying key factors influencing the implementation of programs. To enhance the classification of existing CFIR definitions, as well as its +2/-2 scoring system, this study incorporated the views of relevant experts to: i) improve how themes are scored; and ii) utilise more information regarding the frequency with which themes are identified. This structured, frequency-based approach to the CFIR's scoring process has been trialled as the CFIR-frequency (CFIR-f). Researchers thematically analysed semi-structured interview data from four groups of policy and program experts (N = 24) delivering two family-based therapies in New South Wales (NSW), Australia. Themes identified by less than 50% were excluded from further analysis. Themes identified by 50% or more of expert participants in the four groups were classified as enablers or barriers using clearly defined criteria. Each theme was allocated a score according to how many experts identified it as an enabler or barrier, and then mapped back onto the latest adaptation of the CFIR comprising 67 constructs. The CFIR-f successfully determined three enablers of, and six barriers to, implementation. Enablers included the family-based therapy programs, therapist training and participant monitoring systems. Barriers included referral, data collection and staffing difficulties, NSW adaptation issues and the suitability and safety of the programs for Aboriginal families. The same enablers and barriers were identified using both the CFIR-f and the original scoring approach, and the identified themes were successfully mapped to almost all CFIR constructs (65/67). This paper proposes a more frequency-based approach to CFIR's scoring process (the CFIR-f). By specifically utilising the frequency with which these barriers and enablers are identified, the CFIR-f engenders a list of ranked themes that service providers and policymakers can use to inform their decisions about program modification and implementation.

Indexed as

Allied Health PersonnelAustraliaData CollectionHumansNew South WalesQualitative Research

Identifiers

PMID38033094
PMCPMC10688659
OpenAlexW4389161251

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.