Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39301122›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in health services2024

Changing hearts and minds: theorizing how, when, and under what conditions three social influence implementation strategies work.

Bryan J Weiner, Rosemary D Meza, Predrag Klasnja, Rebecca Lengnick-Hall, Gretchen J Buchanan, Aaron R Lyon, Kayne D Mettert, Marcella H Boynton, Byron J Powell, Cara C Lewis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in health services, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

10 authors.

Bryan J WeinerDepartment of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.
Rosemary D MezaKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA, United States.
Predrag KlasnjaSchool of Information, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.
Rebecca Lengnick-HallBrown School, Washington University in St. Louis, Saint Louis, MO, United States.
Gretchen J BuchananHennepin Healthcare Research Institute, Minneapolis, MN, United States.
Aaron R LyonDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.
Kayne D MettertKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA, United States.
Marcella H BoyntonDivision of General Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapell Hill, NC, United States.
Byron J PowellBrown School, Washington University in St. Louis, Saint Louis, MO, United States.
Cara C LewisKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA, United States.

Funding

Psychology Training in Alcohol Research (PTAR)T32AA007455 · NIAAA · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI MARY E. LARIMER · 1985 to 2026
$11.4M
NIAAA NIH HHS T32 AA007455
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Opinion leadership, educational outreach visiting, and innovation championing are commonly used strategies to address barriers to implementing innovations and evidence-based practices in healthcare settings. Despite voluminous research, ambiguities persist in how these strategies work and under what conditions they work well, work poorly, or work at all. The current paper develops middle-range theories to address this gap. Methods: Conceptual articles, systematic reviews, and empirical studies informed the development of causal pathway diagrams (CPDs). CPDs are visualization tools for depicting and theorizing about the causal process through which strategies operate, including the mechanisms they activate, the barriers they address, and the proximal and distal outcomes they produce. CPDs also clarify the contextual conditions (i.e., preconditions and moderators) that influence whether, and to what extent, the strategy's causal process unfolds successfully. Expert panels of implementation scientists and health professionals rated the plausibility of these preliminary CPDs and offered comments and suggestions on them. Findings: Theoretically, opinion leadership addresses potential adopters' uncertainty about likely consequences of innovation use (determinant) by promoting positive attitude formation about the innovation (mechanism), which results in an adoption decision (proximal outcome), which leads to innovation use (intermediate outcome). As this causal process repeats, penetration, or spread of innovation use, occurs (distal outcome). Educational outreach visiting addresses knowledge barriers, attitudinal barriers, and behavioral barriers (determinants) by promoting critical thinking and reflection about evidence and practice (mechanism), which results in behavioral intention (proximal outcome), behavior change (intermediate outcome), and fidelity, or guideline adherence (distal outcome). Innovation championing addresses organizational inertia, indifference, and resistance (determinants) by promoting buy-in to the vision, fostering a positive implementation climate, and increasing collective efficacy (mechanisms), which leads to participation in implementation activities (proximal outcome), initial use of the innovation with increasing skill (intermediate outcome) and, ultimately, greater penetration and fidelity (distal outcomes). Experts found the preliminary CPDs plausible or highly plausible and suggested additional mechanisms, moderators, and preconditions, which were used to amend the initial CPD. Discussion: The middle-range theories depicted in the CPDs furnish testable propositions for implementation research and offer guidance for selecting, designing, and evaluating these social influence implementation strategies in both research studies and practice settings.

Indexed as

causal pathway diagramsimplementation strategiesmechanismssocial influencetheorizing

Identifiers

PMID39301122
PMCPMC11410765

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.