Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41731572›Full record

ReviewImplementation science communications2026

Evaluating the use of the consolidated framework for implementation research in primary care settings: a systematic review.

Andréa Tenório Correia da Silva, Liza Yurie Teruya Uchimura, Kelvin Hiromiti Albuquerque Yokota, Ana Carolina Nonato, Lais Leiko Batista Azuma, Aline Bicalho Matias, Giselle Burlamaqui Klautau, Rosane Lowenthal, Ana Claudia Camargo Gonçalves Germani, Patricia Coelho de Soárez

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Implementation science communications, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Andréa Tenório Correia da SilvaUniversidade de São Paulo and Faculdade de Ciências Médicas da Santa Casa de São Paulo, Av. Dr. Arnaldo, 455-Cerqueira César, São Paulo-SP, 01246-903, Brazil. andreatenorio@usp.br.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3403-5792
Liza Yurie Teruya UchimuraHcor, R. Des. Eliseu Guilherme, 147-Paraíso, São Paulo-SP, 04004-030, Brazil.
Kelvin Hiromiti Albuquerque YokotaUniversidade de São Paulo, Av. Dr. Arnaldo, 455-Cerqueira César, São Paulo-SP, 01246-903, Brazil.
Ana Carolina NonatoUniversidade de São Paulo, Av. Dr. Arnaldo, 455-Cerqueira César, São Paulo-SP, 01246-903, Brazil.
Lais Leiko Batista AzumaUniversidade de São Paulo, Av. Dr. Arnaldo, 455-Cerqueira César, São Paulo-SP, 01246-903, Brazil.
Aline Bicalho MatiasUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, R. Botucatu, 862-Vila Clementino, São Paulo-SP, 04023-062, Brazil.
Giselle Burlamaqui KlautauFaculdade de Ciências Médicas da Santa Casa de São Paulo, R. Jaguaribe, 155-Vila Buarque, São Paulo-SP, 01224-00, Brazil.
Rosane LowenthalFaculdade de Ciências Médicas da Santa Casa de São Paulo, R. Jaguaribe, 155-Vila Buarque, São Paulo-SP, 01224-00, Brazil.
Ana Claudia Camargo Gonçalves GermaniUniversidade de São Paulo, Av. Dr. Arnaldo, 455-Cerqueira César, São Paulo-SP, 01246-903, Brazil.
Patricia Coelho de SoárezUniversidade de São Paulo, Av. Dr. Arnaldo, 455-Cerqueira César, São Paulo-SP, 01246-903, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrevious systematic reviews have examined the use of the 2009 version of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) in healthcare settings. However, these reviews primarily focused on studies conducted in secondary and tertiary care, with limited attention to its application in primary care. The use of the CFIR in primary care remains underexplored. Given the unique attributes of primary care-guiding principles such as first-contact care, continuity, comprehensiveness, coordination, and people-centeredness-findings from studies in other healthcare settings may not fully translate to the primary care context. This systematic review aimed to investigate how the CFIR has been applied in primary care, evaluate how it aligns with the guiding principles of primary care, and propose refinements to enhance its future application.

methodsWe searched Scopus and PubMed for publications including the terms CFIR and primary care from 2009 to February 15, 2024. We included studies that addressed clinical, organizational, or service delivery interventions implemented in primary care settings interventions within primary care settings. Data abstraction focused on several variables, including study design and location, participants, health topic, CFIR domains and constructs used, rationale for use, and additional implementation frameworks. We also evaluated how the applied constructs related to the WHO guiding principles of primary care.

resultsOut of 394 studies, 105 met the inclusion criteria. The use of the CFIR in primary care steadily increased between 2015 and 2024. Most studies were qualitative (80.9%), focused on non-communicable diseases (19%), conducted during the post-implementation phase (43.8%), centered on healthcare workers' perceptions (40%), and conducted in high-income country (83%). Most studies (61%) applied the five domains of the CFIR. However, 53.3% of the studies did not reported the rationale for selecting the domains. Some CFIR constructs investigated aligned with the guiding principles of primary care, particularly people-centeredness and comprehensiveness.

conclusionsRefinements for applying the CFIR in primary care include enhancing community participation throughout the research process, from study design to interpretation and development of practice recommendations; reporting the rationale for selecting CFIR constructs, including their alignment with the guiding principles of primary care; increasing pre-implementation evaluation to support longitudinal, formative implementation research; and strengthening the role of implementation research in healthcare policies. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: osf.io/4yq2f.

Indexed as

Consolidated framework for implementation researchImplementation sciencePrimary careSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID41731572
PMCPMC13037313

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.