Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42894255›Full record

ArticleImplementation science communications2026

Bridging policy and implementation science: operationalising political and structural determinants for health policy implementation evaluation.

Sarah Forberger, Biljana Meshkovska, Lucia A Reisch, Aleksandra Luszczynska, Hajo Zeeb

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science communications, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Sarah ForbergerLeibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology- BIPS, Achterstrasse 30, 28359, Bremen, Germany. forberger@leibniz-bips.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7169-675X
Biljana MeshkovskaDepartment of Nutrition, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Domus Medica, Sognsvannsveien 9, Oslo, 0372, Norway.
Lucia A ReischLeibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology- BIPS, Achterstrasse 30, 28359, Bremen, Germany.
Aleksandra LuszczynskaInstitute of Psychology, SWPS University, Ostrowskiego Street 30b, Wroclaw, PL53238, Poland.
Hajo ZeebLeibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology- BIPS, Achterstrasse 30, 28359, Bremen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite their critical role in shaping public health policy implementation, key political and structural determinants within implementation frameworks are often poorly defined, underreported, or treated as background rather than as core implementation variables. Existing implementation science frameworks acknowledge these determinants, they lack systematic, operationalised guidance for reporting them, resulting in limited explanatory power, poor comparability, and an overemphasis on individual-level factors.

objectiveThis paper aims to improve reporting standards in public health policy implementation evaluation by defining key political and structural determinants and proposing their operationalisation within established implementation frameworks.

methodsThe synthesis drew on seven systematic and scoping reviews and three in-depth case studies from the PEN, ASTRA, and STOP projects, covering nutrition, physical activity, and tobacco control. We consolidated predefined, theory-informed extraction categories from the underlying reviews, together with recurring reporting gaps, into overarching reporting dimensions. We then contextualised and refined these dimensions using evidence from the three case studies across diverse governance levels and socio-political settings.

resultsWe consolidated and operationalised eight core reporting dimensions: (1) policy objectives and scope, (2) actors, power, and competence, (3) legal status and jurisdiction, (4) policy instruments (regulatory, economic, communicative, behavioural), (5) implementation strategies (centralised vs. decentralised, coordination mechanisms), (6) resources (financial, human, material, and implementation costs), (7) equity impact and (8) policy lifecycle. The dimensions specify political and structural information relevant to policy implementation evaluation and provide a structured basis for more systematic and transparent reporting across diverse policy contexts. The operationalisation is designed to complement and to be integrated into established implementation frameworks.

conclusionSystematic and transparent reporting of political and structural determinants is essential for understanding the success or failure of policy implementation. The proposed operationalisation offers researchers and evaluators a practical approach to strengthen public health policy implementation evaluations. Designed for integration into frameworks such as CFIR and CICI, it may help identify leverage points, support adaptive policy design, and contribute to more effective, equitable, and sustainable public health interventions.

Indexed as

CFIRCICIImplementation evaluationImplementation scienceOperationalisationPolicy implementationPolitical determinantsPublic health policyStructural determinants

Identifiers

PMID42894255
PMCPMC13678997

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.