Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38992702›Full record

ArticleImplementation science : IS2024

How is tailored implementation undertaken using a self-guided toolkit? Qualitative study of the ItFits-toolkit in the ImpleMentAll project.

Tracy L Finch, Sebastian Potthoff, Carl R May, Melissa Girling, Neil Perkins, Christiaan Vis, Leah Bührmann, Anne Etzelmueller, Claire Rosalie van Genugten, Josien Schuurmans and 3 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science : IS, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

13 authors.

Tracy L FinchDepartment of Nursing, Midwifery & Health, Northumbria University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE7 7XA, UK. tracy.finch@northumbria.ac.uk.
Sebastian PotthoffDepartment of Social Work, Education & Community Wellbeing, Northumbria University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE7 7XA, UK.
Carl R MayFaculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, WC1H 9SH, UK.
Melissa GirlingDepartment of Nursing, Midwifery & Health, Northumbria University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE7 7XA, UK.
Neil PerkinsDepartment of Social Work, Education & Community Wellbeing, Northumbria University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE7 7XA, UK.
Christiaan VisDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Leah BührmannDepartment of Social Work, Education & Community Wellbeing, Northumbria University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE7 7XA, UK.
Anne EtzelmuellerHelloBetter/GET.ON Institute, 20249, Hamburg, Germany.
Claire Rosalie van GenugtenClinical, Neuro-, & Developmental Psychology, Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, NL, the Netherlands.
Josien SchuurmansFocus Therapy, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Jordi Piera-JiménezCatalan Health Service, Barcelona, Spain.
Tim RapleyDepartment of Social Work, Education & Community Wellbeing, Northumbria University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE7 7XA, UK.
ImpleMentAll consortium

Funding

Horizon 2020 733025
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe process of tailored implementation is ill-defined and under-explored. The ItFits-toolkit was developed and subsequently tested as a self-guided online platform to facilitate implementation of tailored strategies for internet-based cognitive behavioural therapy (iCBT) services. In ImpleMentAll, ItFits-toolkit had a small but positive effect on the primary outcome of iCBT normalisation. This paper investigates, from a qualitative perspective, how implementation teams developed and undertook tailored implementation using the toolkit within the trial.

methodsImplementation teams in thirteen sites from nine countries (Europe and Australia) used the ItFits-toolkit for six months minimum, consistent with the trial protocol. A qualitative process evaluation was conducted. Descriptive data regarding goals, barriers, strategies, and implementation plans collected within the toolkit informed qualitative data collection in real time. Qualitative data included remote longitudinal interviews (n = 55) with implementation team members (n = 30) and observations of support calls (n = 19) with study sites. Qualitative data were analysed thematically, using a team-based approach.

resultsImplementation teams developed and executed tailored implementation projects across all steps in the toolkit process. Working in a structured way but with room for flexibility, decisions were shaped by team members' ideas and goals, iterative stakeholder engagement, internal and external influences, and the context of the ImpleMentAll project. Although teams reported some positive impacts of their projects, 'time', both for undertaking the work, and for seeing project impacts, was described as a key factor in decisions about implementation strategies and assessments of success.

conclusionThis study responds directly to McHugh et al.'s (2022) call for empirical description of what implementation tailoring looks like in action, in service settings. Self-guided facilitation of tailored implementation enables implementers in service settings to undertake tailoring within their organisations. Implementation tailoring takes considerable time and involves detailed work but can be supported through the provision of implementation science informed guidance and materials, iterative and ongoing stakeholder engagement, and working reflectively in response to external influencing factors. Directions for advancement of tailored implementation are suggested.

Indexed as

Cognitive Behavioral TherapyImplementation ScienceQualitative ResearchAustraliaEuropeHumansInternetInternet-Based InterventionDeterminants assessmentImplementation strategiesImplementersSelf-guidanceTailoringToolkit

Identifiers

PMID38992702
PMCPMC11241992

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.