CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 25Health Policy Implementation ScienceEvaluation and Performance AssessmentHealth Sciences Research and Education

Fidelity and Its Relationship to Implementation Effectiveness, Adaptation, and Dissemination

Allen, Jennifer D., Shelton, Rachel C., Emmons, Karen M., Linnan, Laura A.·2017·Oxford Scholarship Online
DOI 10.1093/oso/9780190683214.003.0016
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

There is substantial variability in the implementation of evidence-based interventions across the United States, which leads to inconsistent access to evidence-based prevention and treatment strategies at a population level. Increased dissemination and implementation of evidence-based interventions could result in significant public health gains. While the availability of evidence-based interventions is increasing, study of implementation, adaptation, and dissemination has only recently gained attention in public health. To date, insufficient attention has been given to the issue of fidelity. Consideration of fidelity is necessary to balance the need for internal and external validity across the research continuum. There is also a need for a more robust literature to increase knowledge about factors that influence fidelity, strategies for maximizing fidelity, methods for measuring and analyzing fidelity, and examining sources of variability in implementation fidelity.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/oso/9780190683214.003.0016

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • Initial research considered deviations from the intervention as originally specified in a protocol or manual to be an implementation failure, even when the setting, population, or circumstances differed substantially from those of the initial experimental research.

    “Initial research considered deviations from the intervention as originally specified in a protocol or manual to be an implementation failure, even when the setting, population, or circumstances differed substantially from those of the initial experimental research that had proved the intervention's effectiveness (3, 9).”

    From The Sustainability of Evidence-Based Interventions and Practices in Public Health and Health Care (2018) · cites this paper as [3]

  • Adaptation is fairly common and often necessary.

    “What is currently known, though, is that although high fidelity has been associated with positive program outcomes (34), adaptation is fairly common (3, 86, 125, 150) and often necessary.”

    From The Sustainability of Evidence-Based Interventions and Practices in Public Health and Health Care (2018) · cites this paper as [3]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Allen, J. D., Shelton, R. C., Emmons, K. M., & Linnan, L. A.
ORCID
Venue
Oxford Scholarship Online
Publisher
Oxford University Press
Published
2017-11-23
DOI
10.1093/oso/9780190683214.003.0016
OpenAlex
W4239594066
Cited by
24
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2014: 1
FWCI
1.79
Type
book
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Oxford University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Evaluation and Performance Assessment
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Sciences Research and Education
Keywords
implementation fidelity, evidence-based interventions, implementation effectiveness, adaptation, dissemination, internal validity, generalizability, fidelity assessment, implementation variability, public health interventions

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