Cited by 46Health Policy Implementation SciencePsychiatric care and mental health servicesHealth Sciences Research and Education

Advancing the Science of Implementation: A Workshop Summary

Chambers, David A.·2008·Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research

Abstract

While much has been written about reducing the gap between science and practice, relatively little progress has been made to develop a sound knowledge base underlying implementation of effective interventions. To respond to these challenges, the National Institute of Mental Health organized a workshop entitled, "Advancing the Science of Implementation: Improving the Fit between Mental Health Intervention Development and Service Systems." Over the 2-day workshop, a multi-disciplinary group of intervention and services researchers, implementers, methodologists, organizational theorists, and clinicians was brought together in an "engaged scholarship" * format composed of small and large-group settings to discuss the development of a sound knowledge base on the implementation of evidence-based practices. Using three specific intervention categories, participants identified constructs seen to be important to the implementation of the model in real-world systems. Following each breakout session, attendees reconvened for a full group discussion and brief presentations were conducted to highlight interventions in the areas of organizational measures, social network analysis and field opportunities. This summary describes some of the constructs relevant to implementation research and presents research questions that, if studied, will lay a solid foundation for implementation research.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10488-007-0146-7

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Contextual factors are key in implementation research.

    “Typically viewed as ‘nuisance’ variance to be controlled in efficacy and effectiveness research, contextual factors are key in implementation research [65-67].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chambers, D. A.
Affiliations
National Institute of Mental Health (US)
Corresponding author
Chambers, David A.
Venue
Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research
Published
2007-11-27
Volume
35
Issue
1-2
Pages
3-10
ISSN
  • 0894-587X (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-3289
OpenAlex
W1971054426
Cited by
46
References
23
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 6
FWCI
4.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Sciences Research and Education
Keywords
implementation research, evidence-based practice, mental health interventions, service systems, organizational measures, social network analysis, research-practice gap, engaged scholarship, intervention development
MeSH terms
Diffusion of Innovation, Education, Humans, Maryland, Mental Health Services, Evidence-Based Medicine

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review