CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,069Health Policy Implementation ScienceHealth Sciences Research and EducationClinical practice guidelines implementation

A compilation of strategies for implementing clinical innovations in health and mental health

Open access
Powell, Byron J., McMillen, J. Curtis, Proctor, Enola K., Carpenter, Christopher R., Griffey, Richard T., Bunger, Alicia C., Glass, Joseph E., York, Jennifer L.·2012·Medical Care Research and Review
DOI 10.1177/1077558711430690PMC PMC3524416
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Efforts to identify, develop, refine, and test strategies to disseminate and implement evidence-based treatments have been prioritized in order to improve the quality of health and mental health care delivery. However, this task is complicated by an implementation science literature characterized by inconsistent language use and inadequate descriptions of implementation strategies. This article brings more depth and clarity to implementation research and practice by presenting a consolidated compilation of discrete implementation strategies, based on a review of 205 sources published between 1995 and 2011. The resulting compilation includes 68 implementation strategies and definitions, which are grouped according to six key implementation processes: planning, educating, financing, restructuring, managing quality, and attending to the policy context. This consolidated compilation can serve as a reference to stakeholders who wish to implement clinical innovations in health and mental health care and can facilitate the development of multifaceted, multilevel implementation plans that are tailored to local contexts.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1077558711430690

Cites

93 of 93 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 32 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data

    The compilation is based on a review of 205 sources published between 1995 and 2011.

    “based upon a review of 205 sources published between 1995 and 2011.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Of the identified sources, 41 were compilations, taxonomies, or reviews of multiple strategies.

    “This included 41 compilations, taxonomies, or reviews of multiple strategies”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Of the identified sources, 149 were empirical, descriptive, or conceptual articles.

    “149 empirical, descriptive, and conceptual articles”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    There were 3 strategies attending to the policy context.

    “strategies that attend to the policy context (n = 3)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    There were 7 restructuring strategies.

    “Strategies to restructure (n = 7)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 13
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 35

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    Many source documents are seminal contributions, but none was intended as a consolidated menu of implementation options for a broad range of health and mental health stakeholders, so each includes only a limited set of strategies.

    “Many of these source documents represent seminal contributions to the field, but none were intended to be a consolidated menu of potential implementation options for a broad range of stakeholders in health and mental healthcare, thus the strategies included in each are limited.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingreasoning

    This review presents a consolidated compilation of discrete implementation strategies, following and extending earlier reviews.

    “This article brings more depth and clarity to implementation research and practice by presenting a consolidated compilation of discrete implementation strategies, based upon a review of 205 sources published between 1995 and 2011.”
    • Also stated in: § New Contributions · plain
      “This review follows and extends previous reviews and compilations by presenting a consolidated compilation of discrete implementation strategies.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Sixteen experts responded to the expert query.

    “We received responses from 16 experts”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    Many other compilations are deliberately limited in scope, covering only strategies with established effectiveness, particular conditions or disciplines, particular settings or studies, exemplar programs, a single target level, or a single strategy type.

    “Other sources are purposely narrow in scope, focusing on: strategies with known evidence on effectiveness (e.g., Bero, et al., 1998; Grimshaw, et al., 2006; Grol & Grimshaw, 2003; Shojania, et al., 2006); specific medical conditions, fields of practice or disciplines (e.g., Cabana, Rushton, & Rush, 2002; Gilbody, Whitty, Grimshaw, & Thomas, 2003; Stone, et al., 2002);”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Bero, et al., 1998

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Grimshaw, et al., 2006

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Grol & Grimshaw, 2003

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingown data

    The 68 strategies are grouped according to six key implementation processes: planning, educating, financing, restructuring, managing quality, and attending to the policy context.

    “which are grouped according to six key implementation processes: planning, educating, financing, restructuring, managing quality, and attending to the policy context.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Of the identified sources, 15 were descriptions of blended strategies.

    “15 descriptions of blended strategies”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    After screening, 142 full-text articles were selected for review.

    “Ultimately, this yielded 142 full-text articles to review.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingown data

    The compilation includes 68 implementation strategies and definitions.

    “The resulting compilation includes 68 implementation strategies and definitions”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    The expert query identified 33 additional sources.

    “who identified 33 additional sources.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    The database search returned 553 abstracts.

    “This search yielded 553 abstracts.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    Many compilations do not provide definitions or provide definitions that do not adequately describe the specific actions stakeholders need to take.

    “Additionally, many of these compilations do not provide definitions or provide definitions that do not adequately describe the specific actions that need to be taken by stakeholders.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    A total of 205 sources were identified.

    “In total, 205 sources were identified”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    There were 16 quality management strategies.

    “Quality management strategies (n = 16)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingown data

    The workgroup classified the strategies into six categories: planning, educating, restructuring, financing, managing quality, and attending to the policy context.

    “the workgroup classified the strategies into six categories that represent larger implementation processes: planning, educating, restructuring, financing, managing quality, and attending to the policy context.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingown data

    The process produced definitions for 68 implementation strategies.

    “The definitions for 68 implementation strategies that emerged from our process are presented in Table 3.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    The eight-member workgroup held seven face-to-face meetings over one year.

    “The eight-member workgroup gathered for seven face-to-face meetings over the course of one year.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    The authors did not assess or exclude sources based on methodological quality and did not evaluate the empirical evidence for the identified strategies.

    “However, we made no effort to assess or exclude sources based upon methodological quality, nor was it within our scope to evaluate the empirical evidence of the strategies we identify, lending further support to the appropriateness of a narrative approach.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    The review covers both health and mental health because many strategies are relevant to both fields, each field emphasizes a different set of strategies, and both can be enhanced through dialogue with the other.

    “We focus on both health and mental health, because while many strategies described in the literature are relevant to both broad fields, we have found that they both emphasize a different array of strategies and stand to be enhanced through “dialogue” with the other.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Every mutable aspect of the implementation context identified by the CFIR may be amenable to targeted and tailored implementation strategies.

    “Indeed, each mutable aspect of the implementation context that the CFIR highlights is potentially amenable to the application of targeted and tailored implementation strategies.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductcitation

    A modified Delphi process was used to develop consensus on the discrete strategies and definitions extracted from the literature.

    “we utilized a modified Delphi process (Fink, Kosecoff, Chassin, & Brook, 1984; Jones & Hunter, 1995) to develop consensus regarding the discrete strategies and definitions that were extracted from the literature by the primary reviewers.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Fink, Kosecoff, Chassin, & Brook, 1984

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Jones & Hunter, 1995

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The EPOC Data Collection Checklist was created to guide systematic reviews on professional, financial, organizational, or regulatory interventions to improve healthcare practice, and thus includes many interventions that apply to improving quality of care more generally.

    “the most influential compilation to date, the Cochrane Collaboration’s Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) group’s Data Collection Checklist (Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group, 2002), was created to guide systematic reviews on professional, financial, organizational, or regulatory interventions to improve healthcare practice.”
    • Also stated in: § Introduction · plain
      “Thus, in addition to implementation strategies, it includes many interventions that apply to improving the quality of care more generally (e.g., case management, arrangements for follow-up, telemedicine).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group, 2002

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    McPheeters and colleagues state that narrative reviews are best done in a team, so the authors used an implementation research workgroup.

    “McPheeters and colleagues (2006) note that narrative reviews are best conducted in a team; thus, we leveraged the expertise of an implementation research workgroup.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites McPheeters and colleagues (2006)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Every workgroup member's views were elicited about every strategy decision.

    “Every work group member’s views were elicited about every strategy decision.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Implementation strategies are rarely defined and often poorly described.

    “inadequate descriptions of implementation strategies”
    • Also stated in: § Introduction · plain
      “Michie and colleagues (2009) bemoan the fact that implementation strategies are rarely defined and are often poorly described.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Michie, et al., 2009

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    The first and second authors reviewed a sample of 50 abstracts and achieved a kappa agreement of .88.

    “The first and second author reviewed a sample of 50 abstracts, and obtained excellent agreement (kappa = .88)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Narrative reviews use a more inductive approach and effectively capture diverse and plural understandings.

    “Narrative reviews involve a more inductive approach (Hammersley, 2002), and are effective in capturing diversities and pluralities of understanding (Jones, 2004).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Hammersley, 2002

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Jones, 2004

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The characteristics of some reviews and compilations may lead healthcare stakeholders to believe that there are relatively few strategies from which to choose.

    “The characteristics of some of these reviews and compilations may lead healthcare stakeholders to believe that there are relatively few strategies from which to choose.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The strategies used will likely vary with the practice being implemented and with contextual factors.

    “The strategies employed will likely differ depending upon the practice being implemented (and a myriad of contextual factors).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    The CFIR proposes that implementation is influenced by intervention characteristics, the outer setting, the inner setting, characteristics of the individuals involved, and the implementation process.

    “The CFIR suggests that implementation is influenced by: 1) intervention characteristics (evidentiary support, relative advantage, adaptability, trialability, and complexity), 2) the outer setting (patient needs and resources, organizational connectedness, peer pressure, external policy and incentives), 3) the inner setting (structural characteristics, networks and communications, culture, climate,”
    • Also stated in: § Conceptual Model · plain
      “the 4) characteristics of the individuals involved (knowledge, self-efficacy, stage of change, identification with organization, etc.), and 5) the process of implementation (planning, engaging, executing, reflecting, evaluating).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Damschroder, et al., 2009

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Two workgroup members reviewed the full-text sources sequentially.

    “Two workgroup members reviewed the full-text sources (n = 205) sequentially”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    A consolidated compilation of implementation strategies will benefit researchers and practitioners who develop and test clinical innovations, administrators and clinical managers considering adoption, funders, and healthcare consumers, families, and advocates by highlighting options and enabling tailored planning.

    “A consolidated compilation of implementation strategies will benefit a number of healthcare stakeholders by highlighting available options and allowing them to thoughtfully plan and execute programs of implementation using multiple strategies tailored to specific settings, needs, and timetables.”
    • Also stated in: § New Contributions · plain
      “For example, researchers and practitioners who develop and test clinical innovations; administrators and clinical managers considering the adoption of an innovation; funders who wish to maximize their investment in clinical innovations; and healthcare consumers, their families, and advocates who desire access to effective services all stand to benefit from a consolidated menu of discrete”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The sources reviewed adequately represent the range of implementation strategies available.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Multiple terms are used for implementation processes and strategies, producing a literature described as a Tower of Babel.

    “For example, multiple terms are used for implementation processes (e.g., knowledge translation, diffusion, dissemination, translation) and strategies (e.g., methods, interventions, models) resulting in a literature that McKibbon and colleagues (2010) describe as a “Tower of Babel.””
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites McKibbon and colleagues (2010)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The consolidated compilation can serve as a reference for stakeholders implementing clinical innovations in health and mental healthcare and can help develop multifaceted, multilevel implementation plans tailored to local contexts.

    “This consolidated compilation can serve as a reference to stakeholders who wish to implement clinical innovations in health and mental healthcare and can facilitate the development of multifaceted, multilevel implementation plans that are tailored to local contexts.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The sources reviewed adequately represent the range of implementation strategies available.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given

    The review was limited to strategies represented in the health and mental health literature.

    “Though we were limited to the strategies represented in the health and mental health literature, we attempted to extract and define strategies that had the potential to impact any of the components specified in the CFIR.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    Some strategies included in the compilation may also help reduce bad practices and critical incidents.

    “Though we focus on the implementation of clinical innovations, some of the included strategies may also be useful in reducing bad practices (e.g. poor hand hygiene) and critical incidences (e.g. infections, unexpected death in heart surgery).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The Institute of Medicine identified assessment of dissemination and implementation strategies as a top-quartile priority for comparative effectiveness research.

    “In fact, the Institute of Medicine (2009) recently identified the assessment of dissemination and implementation strategies as a top-quartile priority for comparative effectiveness research.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Institute of Medicine, 2009

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    Workgroup members had multiple opportunities to express concern about including specific strategies and definitions.

    “the workgroup members had multiple opportunities to express concern regarding the inclusion of specific strategies and definitions.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given

    The expert query involved an international body of scholars.

    “our expert query involved an international body of scholars”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    There are likely strategies in use that are not represented in the compilation.

    “There are likely strategies in use that are not represented in our compilation.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationcitation

    Addressing the Tower of Babel problem would likely require an international consensus group of implementation research leaders.

    “Addressing the “Tower of Babel” problem identified by McKibbon and colleagues (McKibbon, et al., 2010) would likely require an international consensus group of leaders in implementation research.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites McKibbon, et al., 2010

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The authors believe that most strategies in the compilation are broadly applicable.

    “we believe that the majority of the strategies included in the compilation are broadly applicable.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
41 of 41

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The sources reviewed adequately represent the range of implementation strategies available.

    “While it is impossible to develop a comprehensive compilation, we intend to improve upon existing compilations by providing a reference tool that more closely reflects the full range of implementation actions that are available to those who wish to adopt, implement, and sustain innovations in routine care.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The literature is only beginning to describe processes to help innovators build comprehensive blueprints for implementation from known strategies.

    “the literature is only beginning to describe processes to help innovators build comprehensive blueprints for implementation from known strategies.”
2 of 2

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?

  • ASD-CBOs endorsed some 'best practices' in implementation, such as referencing the research literature when selecting practices, training and outcome monitoring.

    “While ASD-CBOs endorsed some 'best practices' in implementation (Aarons et al., 2011; Powell et al., 2012), such as referencing the research literature when selecting practices, training and outcome monitoring, usual implementation often lacked other strategies that may be particularly effective.”

    From Implementation-as-Usual in Community-Based Organizations Providing Specialized Services to Individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Mixed Methods Study (2021) · cites this paper as Powell et al., 2012

    The Results (page unavailable) identify planning, education and quality management—including training and continual evaluation—as implementation strategies. The paper does not report whether ASD-CBOs endorsed those strategies or referenced research literature when selecting practices. Its Limitations also state that the compilation does not assess the empirical evidence for the strategies, so it does not establish them as proven “best practices.” (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The quality of implementation trials has been criticised, and the effects of the strategies for such trials on implementation, patient or public health outcomes have been modest.

    “While there has been a rapid increase in the number of implementation trials over the past decade, the quality of trials has been criticised, and the effects of the strategies for such trials on implementation, patient or public health outcomes have been modest [11–13].”

    From Guidance for conducting feasibility and pilot studies for implementation trials (2020) · cites this paper as [11]

    The Introduction (page unavailable) criticises poor descriptions and inconsistent terminology for implementation strategies, which supports a concern about the quality of the research literature but does not specifically assess the quality of trials. The Discussion (page unavailable) notes variability in strategy effectiveness; it does not say that effects on implementation, patient, or public-health outcomes have been modest. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The implementation of a new model of care is an ongoing process, usually lasting between 2 and 4 years.

    “The implementation of a new model of care is an ongoing process, usually lasting between 2 and 4 years [21,22].”

    From Implementation of Brief Admission by Self-Referral in Child and Adolescent Psychiatry in Sweden: Insights from Implementers and Staff (2023) · cites this paper as [21]

    The Discussion (page unavailable) describes implementation in phases, from making stakeholders aware of an innovation to integrating and maintaining it in usual care. That supports the description of implementation as a process, but the paper does not say it usually lasts two to four years; searches for that duration and for implementation timelines found no such estimate. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • A number of implementation strategies have been identified and discussed in the literature.

    “A number of implementation strategies have been identified and discussed in the literature [36,85-87].”

    From Writing implementation research grant proposals: ten key ingredients (2012) · cites this paper as [86]

  • Terms and definitions for implementation strategies are inconsistent.

    “First, terms and definitions for implementation strategies are inconsistent [7,10].”

    From A refined compilation of implementation strategies: results from the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) project (2015) · cites this paper as [10]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 24

  1. Chamberlain P., 2008, Child Welfare, 87, 27
  2. Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group. (2002). Data collection checklist (pp. 1-30). Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Author.
  3. Eccles M. P., 2009, Knowledge translation in health care: Moving from evidence to practice, 123
  4. Ferlie E., 2009, Knowledge translation in health care: Moving from evidence to practice, 144
  5. Foy R., 2009, Knowledge translation in health care: Moving from evidence to practice, 126
  6. Grimshaw J. M., 2001, Medical Care, 39, II-2
  7. Grol R., 2005, Improving patient care: The implementation of change in clinical practice
  8. Gupta S., 2009, Knowledge translation in health care: Moving from evidence to practice, 131
  9. Jones K., 2004, Qualitative Report, 9, 94
  10. Markiewicz J., 2006, Learning collaborative toolkit
  11. Massoud M., 2006, A framework for spread: From local improvements to system-wide change
  12. O’Connor A. M., 2009, Knowledge translation in health care: Moving from evidence to practice, 137
  13. Rabin B. A., 2008, Journal of Public Health Management, 14, 117
  14. Ryan R., 2010, Paper presented at the National Medicines Symposium
  15. Sanders M. R., 2002, Behavior Therapist, 25, 156
  16. Shojania K. G., 2004, Closing the quality gap: A critical analysis of quality improvement strategies
  17. Sosna T., 2006, Community development team model: Supporting the model adherent implementation of programs and practices
  18. 10.1001/jama.1995.03520380066037 · DOI
  19. Wensing M., 2009, Knowledge translation in health care: Moving from evidence to practice, 94
  20. Wensing M., 2005, Improving patient care: The implementation of change in clinical practice, 185
  21. Wensing M., 2005, Improving patient care: The implementation of change in clinical practice, 147
  22. Wensing M., 2005, Improving patient care: The implementation of change in clinical practice, 173
  23. Wensing M., 1998, British Journal of General Practice: The Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 48, 991
  24. Zed P. J., 2003, Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine, 5, 331

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Powell, B. J., McMillen, J. C., Proctor, E. K., Carpenter, C. R., Griffey, R. T., Bunger, A. C., Glass, J. E., & York, J. L.
Affiliations
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
  • University of Chicago (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
Corresponding author
Powell, Byron J.
ORCID
Venue
Medical Care Research and Review
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2011-12-26
Volume
69
Issue
2
Pages
123-157
ISSN
  • 1077-5587 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-6801
DOI
10.1177/1077558711430690
PMC
PMC3524416
OpenAlex
W2052429590
Cited by
1,069
References
93
Citations by year
2026: 57 · 2025: 80 · 2024: 121 · 2023: 98 · 2022: 144 · 2021: 141 · 2020: 86 · 2019: 64 · 2018: 71 · 2017: 49 · 2016: 38 · 2015: 53 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 27 · 2012: 11
FWCI
3.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
  • Medical Care Research and Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) (submittedVersion)
  • UNC Libraries
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5p30mh068579-05)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (P30-MH-068579, T32MH019117, T32MH019960)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (T32DA015035)
  • National Cancer Institute (KM1CA156708)
  • National Center for Research Resources (TL1RR024995, UL1RR024992)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Sciences Research and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
Keywords
implementation strategies, implementation research, dissemination of evidence-based treatment, clinical innovation, mental health services, health care delivery, implementation process, planning, financing, restructuring, quality management
MeSH terms
Delivery of Health Care, Diffusion of Innovation, Humans, Mental Health, 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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-09-28.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-09-28.

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