ArticleFrontiers in health services2026
Operationalizing Iterative RE-AIM in two pragmatic nursing home trials to support an adaptation learning cycle.
Article in Frontiers in health services, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Complex, heterogeneous settings such as nursing homes require ongoing adaptation of interventions and implementation strategies. Iterative RE-AIM offers a structured approach to guide adaptations, but how the approach is operationalized may need to vary across implementation contexts. We describe how two pragmatic nursing home trials operationalized Iterative RE-AIM with FRAME-IS to enable a systematic adaptation learning cycle. Methods: We conducted a narrative analysis of two ongoing multi-site trials: TEAM EFFORT (focused on falls reduction in State Veterans Homes) and 40 WINKS (focused on sleep improvement in nursing home residents with dementia). Both used RE-AIM for evaluation and FRAME-IS to document adaptations. Each operationalized the Iterative RE-AIM steps based on study scope, resources, team structure, and implementation timing, with a primary focus on refining a coach-supported implementation strategy. Results: TEAM EFFORT embedded adaptation-related data collection, deliberation, and decision-making within weekly team meetings, supported by an ongoing input tool; 40 WINKS used individual-level surveys followed by structured, once-per-wave team gatherings to decide on adaptations. These two operationalizations illustrate how the timing, methods, and cadence of an adaptation learning cycle based on Iterative RE-AIM can vary in response to implementation context. Discussion: Iterative RE-AIM can be operationalized differently across implementation contexts while remaining faithful to its underlying intent. Paired with FRAME-IS, Iterative RE-AIM can enable an adaptation learning cycle that integrates systematic documentation of adaptations with structured team deliberation. Rather than prescribing a single Iterative RE-AIM implementation protocol, these findings suggest that operationalization can respond to the context in which implementation occurs.
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.