ArticleImplementation science communications2025
Leveraging intermediaries' skillsets to build implementation research and practice infrastructure: a qualitative case study.
Article in Implementation science communications, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundImplementation science as a field is rapidly advancing. Moreover, implementation science plays a pivotal role in driving learning health systems to better realize health outcomes and impact for our communities. Yet, few reports detail the infrastructures that underpin embedding and managing implementation science activities. Furthermore, there is little guidance for designing these infrastructures (people-powered and/or inanimate supports essential for embedding implementation research questions in pilot, spread and scale initiatives) to address local research and practice needs. The Implementation Science Collaborative is one such infrastructure in Alberta, Canada that leverages existing expertise in implementation research and practice to facilitate embedded implementation research and increase the success rates of health innovation implementation for better health outcomes. This study sought to provide actionable recommendations for designing effective implementation infrastructure by examining the co-design of the Implementation Science Collaborative.
methodsWe conducted a longitudinal case study (2018-2021) of the Implementation Science Collaborative using document analysis and semi-structured interviews. We collected data from initiative planning and operations documents (n = 190) and semi-structured interviews with Implementation Science Collaborative members (n = 6). We applied the Large-Scale Change Driver Model as the analytical framework for qualitative analysis to generate insights into designing cross-sectoral implementation science infrastructure.
resultsOur analysis showed that infrastructure design and operationalization followed established principles of implementation planning and execution. Implementation intermediaries proved to be effective facilitators as they had the backgrounds required to guide co-design and implementation planning. Their political neutrality in the resulting infrastructure enabled them to address power imbalances among co-design partners. However, strong management leadership remained irreplaceable. Cross-sectoral leadership was essential in fostering and solidifying the partnerships required for supporting the local learning health system.
conclusionThe study findings highlight the effectiveness of a co-design approach, facilitated by intermediaries, in developing local implementation science infrastructure and management systems as a promising practice to implement for achieving outcomes. This approach enabled the creation of infrastructure designs that meet diverse user needs. However, co-design is a complex process that benefits from both intermediaries' skills and cross-sectoral leadership knowledge of the local learning health system.
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.