ArticleImplementation science : IS2026
Five years of the Implementation Research Logic Model: a citation analysis and systematic scoping review of its use in implementation research and practice.
Article in Implementation science : IS, 2026. 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Implementation Research Logic Model (IRLM) was developed to enhance the rigor, transparency, and reproducibility of implementation research by integrating key elements of implementation research and practice-contextual factors/determinants, implementation strategies, mechanisms, and implementation and health outcomes-into a unified framework. Since its publication in 2020, the IRLM has been widely applied to plan, evaluate, and communicate implementation research. This paper synthesizes diverse IRLM use cases to advance its application and accelerate discovery in implementation science.
methodsWe conducted a citation analysis and systematic scoping review to assess the uptake, application, and adaptation of the IRLM. A forward citation search identified 331 citing articles, and a scoping review identified 124 additional studies using other logic models. Articles were coded for IRLM use, phase of application, construct linking, data sources, community engagement, and framework integration. Descriptive statistics and thematic/pattern analysis were used to summarize findings.
resultsOf the 331 citing articles, 118 included a completed IRLM. Most were used during the planning phase (68%), with fewer applied to executing (6%), reporting (22%), or synthesis (4%). The IRLM was cited across diverse disciplines and countries, but few studies used it across multiple phases or reported its use in reporting or synthesis. Only 14% demonstrated comprehensive causal logic linking across core elements. In contrast, other logic models often lacked integration of implementation-specific constructs. Community and partner engagement was reported in 61% of studies.
conclusionsThe IRLM can be a valuable tool for the field of implementation science but remains underutilized across the phases of implementation research with inconsistent applications of the recommendations from the 2020 article. Enhancing guidance on construct linking, strategy mechanisms, and partner engagement may improve its utility and impact in advancing equitable and rigorous implementation efforts.
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.