ArticleImplementation science communications2026
The role of external and internal context on adoption and implementation of evidence-based practices: a serial case study qualitative analysis of top performers in the HEALing Communities Study.
Article in Implementation science communications, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04111939 (HEALing Communities Study), which is not on this 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.
HEALing Communities Study: Developing and Testing an Integrated Approach to Address the Opioid Crisis
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
Abstract
backgroundCommunity coalitions are a common implementation strategy for addressing public health challenges, such as the opioid epidemic. There remains a lack of understanding of the factors that support implementation effectiveness for community coalitions. This study leverages the HEALing Communities Study (HCS) which tested the Communities That HEAL (CTH) approach to supporting community coalitions to increase delivery of opioid overdose and naloxone distribution (OEND) and medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) through facilitation, data-driven decision making, and a communications campaign.
methodsUsing a parallel convergent, nested serial case study with a positive deviance design, we selected high performing waitlist control communities participating in the HCS for further examination. Performance was defined based on average ranking across a set of implementation measures; the top performing urban and rural community within each of the four HCS sites was then selected for in-depth case study. For selected sites, we conducted thematic analysis of qualitative interviews with coalition members (n = 41) conducted at the end of the implementation phase. Analysis was aligned with the PRISM/ RE-AIM framework.
resultsDespite achieving top performance, these communities still faced persistent and varied challenges related to OUD service delivery and access. However, community assets and policy changes provide a foundation for improvement. Implementation success was supported by representative coalition membership, high engagement, and alignment with coalition goals. Coalition members were highly collaborative and shared a vision for their community. Implementation success was also supported by coalition buy-in to the CTH process. Structured data connectivity and sharing facilitated effective strategy selection, while multi-channel communications campaigns increased awareness and uptake of OUD and MOUD services. No differences were observed across urban and rural communities.
conclusionsImplementation success reflects the synergy among external context, coalition strength, and intervention processes. Community coalition–based strategies benefit from ensuring representative membership and shared goals to build buy-in, while also leveraging data infrastructure and communication campaigns to promote effective implementation of EBPs.
trial registrationNCT04111939.
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.