ArticleGlobal implementation research and applications2024
Usability Testing of a Web Tool for Dissemination and Implementation Science Models.
Article in Global implementation research and applications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Engaging in Advocacy to Promote Policy Change: Incorporating Advocacy-Informed Research and Applying the PRISM Implementation Science Model.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Implementation research assessment instruments: a webtool to identify, compare and select assessment instruments connected with implementation science theories, models, and frameworks.Frontiers in health services · 2026Article
- Dissemination and Implementation Theories, Models, or Frameworks Utilized in International Aging Research: A Citation Analysis.Global implementation research and applications · 2026Review
- The 10-year anniversary of the dissemination and implementation models in health interactive webtool: History, refinement, use, and guidance.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Dissemination and Implementation science is dedicated to increasing the speed of evidence-based research translated into practice as guided by one or multiple D&I theories, models, and frameworks. The Dissemination and Implementation Models in Health Research and Practice web tool guides users on how to plan, select, combine, adapt, use, and assess theories, models, and frameworks. This paper describes usability testing to update the web tool. Iterative user testing was conducted with implementation science research and clinical participants to facilitate updates and optimize the functionality of the tool. A multi-step protocol involved quantitative and qualitative data collection including a survey, interviews, and a usability testing session. Data from the pre-testing surveys were summarized as frequencies. Data from the usability testing sessions were analyzed using a hybrid adapted deductive rapid matrix qualitative analysis. Data from the interviews were analyzed by deductive a priori coding. Fifteen interviewees represented different research and clinical groups and levels of expertise utilizing D&I TMFs. Participants were purposively selected to represent a range of disciplines and D&I expertise, all invited via one-time email. The 847 total interview comments were reduced by similarity to 259 comments, and 142 were feasible changes fitting the priorities of the web tool. Changes to content, format, and functionality are described in this paper. The iterative usability testing elicited improvements to the web tool including adding more examples, definitions, visuals, and tutorials and simplifying the written content. The web tool remains flexible for additions concerning health equity, de-implementation, and other issues. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43477-024-00125-7.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.