ArticlePloS one2024
Proposal of the Implementation Theory Selection Model and exemplar application in fall injury prevention.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe use of theories, models and/or frameworks (TMFs) in implementation research and practice is essential for developing useful and testable implementation strategies. Recommendations and tools exist to aid implementation groups in selecting TMFs, but they do not explicitly outline a systematic method for identifying and selecting TMFs. This paper aimed to (1) propose a systematic consensus-based method to select TMFs to support implementation processes, and to (2) demonstrate the use of this novel method in the context of researching the implementation of hip protectors for fracture prevention in long-term care (LTC). MATERIALS &
methodsWe developed a systematic, consensus-based method for selecting TMFs, referred to as the Implementation Theory Selection Model (ITSM). The ITSM comprises five steps: (1) identify potentially relevant TMFs; (2) narrow the pool of TMFs; (3) appraise the relevance of eligible TMFs; (4) prioritize a short-list of TMFs for further, in-depth consideration; and (5) select TMFs through consensus with investigators and research user partners. We operationalized each step of the ITSM through a project investigating determinants of hip protector use and organizational readiness for implementation in a LTC organization in Ontario, Canada.
resultsUsing the ITSM in our case example, we identified 66 TMFs (Step 1). Of these, 23 met our eligibility criteria (Step 2) and were appraised twice, by five appraisers (Step 3). Six TMFs (Step 4) advanced to the consensus meeting, which was attended by nine investigators and three research users, including two organizational partners and one older adult. Three rounds of voting yielded a tie between the TMFs the group felt would be most appropriate. Research users from our partner LTC organization made the final selection preferring the combination of the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model and Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (Step 5).
conclusionsThe ITSM offers a step-by-step guide for implementation groups to adopt a rigorous, transparent and reproducible method for TMF selection. Although we have demonstrated the feasibility of operationalizing each step of the ITSM in our case example, continued research is needed to evaluate and refine the ITSM to ensure it is appropriate for a wide variety of implementation contexts.
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.