The DOI matches its Crossref record; 100 of the 103 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 4 of the 45 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: The Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services, or PARIHS framework, was first published in 1998. Since this time, work has been ongoing to further develop, refine and test it. Widely used as an organising or conceptual framework to help both explain and predict why the implementation of evidence into practice is or is not successful, PARIHS was one of the first frameworks to make explicit the multi-dimensional and complex nature of implementation as well as highlighting the central importance of context. Several critiques of the framework have also pointed out its limitations and suggested areas for improvement. DISCUSSION: Building on the published critiques and a number of empirical studies, this paper introduces a revised version of the framework, called the integrated or i-PARIHS framework. The theoretical antecedents of the framework are described as well as outlining the revised and new elements, notably, the revision of how evidence is described; how the individual and teams are incorporated; and how context is further delineated. We describe how the framework can be operationalised and draw on case study data to demonstrate the preliminary testing of the face and content validity of the revised framework. This paper is presented for deliberation and discussion within the implementation science community. Responding to a series of critiques and helpful feedback on the utility of the original PARIHS framework, we seek feedback on the proposed improvements to the framework. We believe that the i-PARIHS framework creates a more integrated approach to understand the theoretical complexity from which implementation science draws its propositions and working hypotheses; that the new framework is more coherent and comprehensive and at the same time maintains it intuitive appeal; and that the models of facilitation described enable its more effective operationalisation.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This paper revises the PARIHS framework into the integrated i-PARIHS framework, positioning facilitation as the active ingredient that aligns innovation, recipients, and inner/outer context. It draws on critiques, theoretical antecedents, and three implementation case studies to describe and preliminarily test the revised framework’s face and content validity.
Key findings
- The revised i-PARIHS framework replaces the original equation SI = ƒ(E,C,F) with SI = Facn(I + R + C), where successful implementation is specified as achievement of agreed implementation/project goals, uptake and embedding of the innovation, engagement and ownership by individuals/teams/stakeholders, and minimised context-related variation across settings.
- The CKD case reported recorded prevalence increased by 1.2% in 30 participating practices (n = 1,863 additional patients with CKD) compared with a national increase of 0.2%; blood pressure management improved from 34 to 74% (cohort 1) and 58 to 83% (cohort 2).
- The continence case’s cluster RCT showed no difference between control and intervention wards on overall compliance to continence recommendations, but significant improvements on several secondary outcomes and 1 of the 4 specific recommendations; the nutrition stepped wedge RCT showed no difference in weight loss after 1 week, though key audit measures improved.
- A cited systematic review found practices supported by a facilitator were 2.76 times more likely to adopt evidence-based clinical guidelines; within 23 studies, audit and feedback was used in 100% and interactive consensus building/goal setting in 91%; the NeoKIP trial reported reduced neonatal mortality of 49% in the third year.
Methods
- Design: conceptual and theoretical revision paper introducing the i-PARIHS framework, building on published critiques and empirical studies of the original PARIHS framework.
- Data/sample: three implementation case studies summarised in Table 1—CKD in primary care, continence care in nursing homes, and nutritional care of older adults in acute care—plus literature on PARIHS applications, critiques, and theoretical antecedents.
- Analysis: narrative synthesis and framework development, with case study data used to demonstrate preliminary testing of the face and content validity of the revised framework.
Limitations
- Stated: the authors note that ongoing development and evaluation of i-PARIHS are needed; prospective implementation studies remain limited; construct boundaries may overlap and attempts to distinguish them may be imperfect; the label “recipients” may imply a passive role; and future work is needed to test utility, applicability, and content and construct validity.
- Stated: evidence from effectiveness studies of facilitation is mixed, likely because facilitation itself is a complex intervention involving one or more facilitators applying combined improvement and team-focused strategies.
- Evident: validation reported here is preliminary face and content validity using illustrative case studies, not full psychometric or prospective outcome validation; two of the cited case study RCTs had null primary outcomes.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Figures
Verification
Claims the paper makes
28 Not checked yet · 21 Own interpretation · 5 No basis given · 1 Supported · 1 Partly supported · 1 Own result · accuracy not yet measured
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“there is good evidence to suggest that groups or teams of individuals have an important role in determining the uptake of new knowledge in practice.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > The recipient construct
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [38] Kislov R, Harvey G, Walshe K. Collaborations for leadership in applied health research and care: lessons from the theory of communities of practice. Implement Sci. 2011;6:64. source
The Discussion’s ‘CoP knowledge sharing’ section says professional communities shape how knowledge flows within and between healthcare groups. The ‘CoP formation and manageability’ section also reports that communities of practice can promote knowledge transfer and enhance interprofessional clinical practice, supporting the citing sentence’s hedged claim. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Supportedcites [39] Gabbay J, May A. Evidence based guidelines or collectively constructed “mindlines?” Ethnographic study of knowledge management in primary care. BMJ. 2004;329:1013. source
The Abstract reports that primary care clinicians’ knowledge was shaped through interactions with colleagues and informal communities of practice. The Knowledge in practice section describes this as a social process and suggests that such communities may be key to implementing research. This supports the citing sentence’s hedged claim that groups or teams play an important role in uptake. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Supportedcites [40] Wieringa S, Greenhalgh T. 10 years of mindlines: a systematic review and commentary. Implement Sci. 2015;10:45. source
The Results section describes working teams validating external knowledge through informal discussion and adapting it for practical use. It also reports that discussion with colleagues can help practitioners make sense of knowledge before applying it in practice. These passages support the claimed importance of groups and teams in knowledge uptake. (LLM, conf=0.88)
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“For example, in the case study on promoting continence, in some of the countries studied, a focus on continence formed part of the external accreditation system for nursing homes. This created a driver for introducing changes to improve the management of continence at a local level [45].”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > The context construct
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [45] Harvey G, Kitson A, Munn Z. Promoting continence in nursing homes in four European countries: the use of PACES as a mechanism for improving the uptake of evidence-based recommendations. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2012;10(4):388–96. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results section (‘Progress in applying PACES to audit evidence-based continence recommendations’) reports that nursing homes introduced local changes after reviewing their continence-audit findings. It does not say that continence was part of an external accreditation system in some countries or that accreditation drove those changes; a search for ‘accreditation’ found no such passage. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.82)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
In the paper
“Similarly in the case study of CKD, the presence of CKD indicators in the pay-for-performance system in primary care created an incentive for improvement [21].”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > The context construct
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [21] Harvey G, Oliver K, Humphreys J, Rothwell K, Hegarty J. Improving the identification and management of chronic kidney disease in primary care: lessons from a staged improvement collaborative. Int J Qual Health Care. 2015;27(1):10–6. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In all three cases, the methods employed by facilitators typically involved improvement approaches such as Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles and audit and feedback, underpinned by project management.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > How the i-PARIHS framework is actioned
plainn = 3- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Increased interest and awareness of relevant theories that can and should inform implementation strategies [23–25]”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [23] Eccles M, Grimshaw J, Walker A, Johnston M, Pitts N. Changing the behavior of healthcare professionals: the use of theory in promoting the uptake of research findings. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005;58(2):107–12. source
- Not checked yetcites [24] Estabrooks CA, Thompson DS, Lovely JJ, Hofmeyer A. A guide to knowledge translation theory. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2006;26(1):25–36. source
- Not checked yetcites [25] Rycroft-Malone J. Theory and knowledge translation: setting some coordinates. Nurs Res. 2007;56(4):S78–85. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This extension enables the i-PARIHS framework to consider the impact individuals and teams have in supporting or resisting an innovation.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > The recipient construct
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [12] Rycroft-Malone J, Seers K, Chandler J, Hawkes C, Crichton N, Allen C, et al. The role of evidence, context, and facilitation in an implementation trial: implications for the development of the PARIHS framework. Implement Sci. 2013;8(1):28. source
- Not checked yetcites [37] Flodgren G, Parmelli E, Doumit G, Gattellari M, O’Brien MA, Grimshaw J et al. Local opinion leaders: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Aug 10;(8):CD000125. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Recognition of the diverse ways in which people were applying PARIHS, not simply to guide the implementation of more conventional research evidence in the form of clinical guidelines or evidence summaries, but to inform and evaluate developments in practice more generally [26]”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [26] McCormack B, Manley K, Titchen A. Practice development in nursing and healthcare. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons; 2013.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As these examples illustrate, the people involved in implementation, including their views, beliefs and established ways of practice, can significantly affect the ease of introducing an innovation or change.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > The recipient construct
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The characteristic of the knowledge creates a set of conditions that make it more or less likely to be recognised and applied.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > The innovation construct
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [33] Rogers EM. Diffusion of innovations. 4th ed. New York: The Free Press; 1995.
- Not checked yetcites [34] Rogers EM. Diffusion of innovations. 5th ed. New York: Free Press; 2003.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Growing evidence on the key role individuals play in the implementation process [12]”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [12] Rycroft-Malone J, Seers K, Chandler J, Hawkes C, Crichton N, Allen C, et al. The role of evidence, context, and facilitation in an implementation trial: implications for the development of the PARIHS framework. Implement Sci. 2013;8(1):28. source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Probably not a substantial claim. 33
- It may state two separate claims as one. 16
In the paper
“This was particularly the case for older patients as some General Practitioners (GPs) and practice nurses viewed declining renal function as a natural part of ageing and believed that disclosing a diagnosis of CKD could cause unnecessary anxiety in patients. By adopting this approach, opportunities to improve self-management and overall management of cardiovascular disease and to address the issue”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > The recipient construct
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [41] Blakeman T, Protheroe J, Chew-Graham C, Rogers A, Kennedy A. Understanding the management of early-stage chronic kidney disease in primary care: a qualitative study. J Roy Coll Gen Pract. 2012;62:e233–42. source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In one nursing home, the staff responsible for facilitating implementation collected stories from residents about their experience of living with incontinence, which provided a very powerful motivational tool to convince their colleagues of the need to change.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > The recipient construct
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Focusing on goals to improve the assessment and attainment of continence amongst residents, a key area was addressing care staffs’ strongly held views as to whether such goals were achievable, particularly where residents had been managed as ‘incontinent’ over prolonged periods of time. This required a significant amount of effort to change the mindset amongst nursing home staff about achieving”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > The recipient construct
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the reality of making these supplements available at the point of care delivery required the agreement of financial support to make the supplements, and the fridges to store them in, available in the ward setting. Furthermore, negotiations with the stocks department were needed to address the issue of stock supply and management.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > The context construct
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is also apparent that the relationship between the innovation and the recipients is in many ways an inter-dependent one.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > The recipient construct
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We argue that evidence is one type of knowledge and (new) knowledge is the substance that needs to be introduced in order to generate change and improvement.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > The innovation construct
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the PARIHS framework, we defined context in terms of resources, culture, leadership and orientation to evaluation and learning; however, we did not delineate between the immediate local context and the wider organisational context.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > The context construct
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In our revised, i-PARIHS framework, successful implementation is primarily specified in terms of the achievement of implementation/project goals and results from the facilitation of an innovation with the recipients in their (local, organisational and health system) context (Table 2).”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Successful implementation can be primarily specified as the achievement of implementation/project goals.
In the paper
“people rarely take evidence in the original form of a systematic review or clinical guideline and directly apply it within an implementation project rather they incorporate evidence in a number of different ways, which typically involves adapting the original evidence in some way to suit their particular situation”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > The innovation construct
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [30] Hargreaves D. Creative professionalism: the role of teachers in the knowledge society. London: Demos; 1998.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This reinforces that there is not a single right way to apply facilitator roles; however, there are clear benefits in mechanisms that provide support and mentoring to new or less experienced facilitators.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > How the i-PARIHS framework is actioned
boostedcorrelationaln = 3- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In some cases—and particularly where facilitation is part of another role—the facilitator may feel like a lone agent. However, given the scope and complexity of the role, this is not a desirable situation and can result in individual feelings of isolation and being overwhelmed [62].”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > How the i-PARIHS framework is actioned
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [62] Kitson A, Harvey G. Getting started with facilitation: the facilitator’s role. In: Harvey G, Kitson A, editors. Implementing evidence-based practice in healthcare: a facilitation guide. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge; 2015. p. 70–84. source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The inter-play between constructs that influence implementation is generally poorly understood, not least due to the problems of boundary delineation mentioned above; as such, there is a need for more in-depth longitudinal studies which examine the dynamics of the innovation, the actors involved, the context and the proposed model of facilitation.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > Where next?
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This reflects the work that has been undertaken to explicitly integrate the conceptual framework with supporting theories and an operational model of facilitation.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Conclusions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“PARIHS claimed an eclectic provenance of relevant theories and philosophical perspectives [1].”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > The underpinning theoretical antecedents of the i-PARIHS framework
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [1] Kitson A, Rycroft-Malone J, Harvey G, McCormack B, Seers K, Titchen A. Evaluating the successful implementation of evidence into practice using the PARIHS framework: theoretical and practical challenges. Implement Sci. 2008;3:1. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Another criticism of PARIHS was the lack of detail around its theoretical foundations.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > The underpinning theoretical antecedents of the i-PARIHS framework
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [1] Kitson A, Rycroft-Malone J, Harvey G, McCormack B, Seers K, Titchen A. Evaluating the successful implementation of evidence into practice using the PARIHS framework: theoretical and practical challenges. Implement Sci. 2008;3:1. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Experienced facilitators learn how to manage this uncertainty and keep individuals and teams on track.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > How the i-PARIHS framework is actioned
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The i-PARIHS framework therefore locates the success or otherwise of implementation upon the ability of the facilitator and the facilitation process to enable recipients within their particular context to adopt and apply the innovation by tailoring their intervention appropriately.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > The facilitation construct
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Rests on an assumption: Implementation of evidence into practice is a complex, multi-dimensional process.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“One that has been applied in healthcare is normalisation process theory [77, 78], which acknowledges the interaction of actors (recipients) within their context and proposes four constructs titled coherence, cognitive participation, collective action and reflexive monitoring as the generative mechanisms required to routinely embed innovations.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > The underpinning theoretical antecedents of the i-PARIHS framework
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [77] May C, Finch T. Implementation, embedding, and integration: an outline of Normalization Process Theory. Sociology. 2009;43(3):535–54. source
- Not checked yetcites [78] May C, Mair F, Finch T, MacFarlane A, Dowrick C, Treweek S, et al. Development of a theory of implementation and integration: normalization Process Theory. Implement Sci. 2009;4(1):29. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“From the discussion in the paper, we have tried to delineate the boundaries between the constructs of innovation, recipients and context; yet we know that, depending on the situation, there may be overlap between them thus any attempt to distinguish them may be imperfect and open for debate.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > Where next?
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The reality, however, is very different; the interrelationship between the innovation, the recipients and the multiple layers of contexts is often unpredictable, fluid and iterative.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > How the i-PARIHS framework is actioned
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“For example, Rogers highlighted the importance of understanding different groups within the intended audience for innovation and how they are likely to react, as well as making use of peer-to-peer conversations and credible, trusted teachers and leaders to bring people on board with the change [33, 34].”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > The underpinning theoretical antecedents of the i-PARIHS framework
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [33] Rogers EM. Diffusion of innovations. 4th ed. New York: The Free Press; 1995.
- Not checked yetcites [34] Rogers EM. Diffusion of innovations. 5th ed. New York: Free Press; 2003.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In our deliberations with i-PARIHS, we have continued with the theoretical eclecticism but have tried to present it in a more coherent way [16].”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > The underpinning theoretical antecedents of the i-PARIHS framework
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [16] Harvey G, Kitson A. PARIHS re-visited: introducing i-PARIHS. In: Harvey G, Kitson A, editors. Implementing evidence-based practice in health care: a facilitation guide. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge; 2015. p. 25–46. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“From this brief overview of theories, a number of common themes are apparent which reinforce the complex, dynamic and non-linear nature of implementation and emphasise the importance of experiential learning at the level of individuals, teams and organisations.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > The underpinning theoretical antecedents of the i-PARIHS framework
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Fundamentally, this theoretical perspective on facilitation emphasises the importance of enabling others, as opposed to telling, teaching, persuading or coercing them to act.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > The underpinning theoretical antecedents of the i-PARIHS framework
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [82] Rogers CR. Freedom to learn—a view of What Education Might Become. Charles Merrill: Columbus, Ohio; 1969.
- Not checked yetcites [83] Heron J. The facilitator’s handbook. London: Kogan Page; 1989.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Within the 23 studies reviewed, facilitators employed a number of different facilitation strategies, in particular audit and feedback (used in 100 per cent of studies) and interactive consensus building and goal setting (91 per cent use), alongside reminders, tailoring to context and quality improvement tools such as Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > The facilitation construct
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [52] Baskerville NB, Liddy C, Hogg W. Systematic review and meta-analysis of practice facilitation within primary care settings. Ann Fam Med. 2012;10:63–74. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Likewise, we recognise that the labelling of the construct ‘recipients’ may present a rather passive role for the actors involved in implementation.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > Where next?
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Facilitation is operationalised through a network of novice, experienced and expert facilitators applying a range of enabling skills and improvement strategies to structure the implementation process, engage and manage relationships between key stakeholders and identify and negotiate barriers to implementation within the contextual setting.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Conclusions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The PARIHS conceptual framework was developed in an attempt to represent the dynamic and multi-faceted nature of implementation in healthcare.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Conclusions
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [1] Kitson A, Rycroft-Malone J, Harvey G, McCormack B, Seers K, Titchen A. Evaluating the successful implementation of evidence into practice using the PARIHS framework: theoretical and practical challenges. Implement Sci. 2008;3:1. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The revised i-PARIHS framework positions facilitation as the active ingredient of implementation, assessing and aligning the innovation to be implemented with the intended recipients in their local, organisational and wider system context.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Conclusions
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We propose that facilitation is the construct that activates implementation through assessing and responding to characteristics of the innovation and the recipients (both as individuals and in teams) within their contextual setting.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > The facilitation construct
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Implementation of evidence into practice is a complex, multi-dimensional process.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our hypothesis is that the further out into the spiral the facilitator moves, the greater the level of experience and skill they will need.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > How the i-PARIHS framework is actioned
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: fails — The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Weiner’s theory of organisational readiness to change [71] proposes that readiness depends on collective behaviour change linked to two key factors, described as change commitment (wanting to change) and change efficacy (able to change).”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > The underpinning theoretical antecedents of the i-PARIHS framework
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [71] Weiner B. A theory of organizational readiness for change. Implement Sci. 2009;4(1):67. source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This likely reflects the fact that facilitation itself is a complex intervention, involving one or more individuals in the role of facilitator, applying a combination of improvement and team-focused strategies to enable and support change.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > The facilitation construct
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This in turn suggests that whilst novice facilitators may be able to support locally focused implementation projects (in terms of working with a local team to plan and undertake the project), they are likely to need the support of a more experienced facilitator to assess and negotiate some of the more challenging barriers or contextual factors they may encounter.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > How the i-PARIHS framework is actioned
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“As others have noted, there is still more work to do on clarifying the concept of facilitation [80, 81].”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Main Text > The underpinning theoretical antecedents of the i-PARIHS framework
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [80] Dogherty EJ, Harrison MB, Graham ID. Facilitation as a role and process in achieving evidence-based practice in nursing: a focused review of concept and meaning. Worldviews Evid Based Nurs. 2010;7(2):76–89.
- Not checked yetcites [81] Berta W, Cranley L, Dearing JW, Dogherty EJ, Squires JE, Estabrooks CA. Why (we think) facilitation works: insights from organizational learning theory. Implement Sci. 2015;10(1):1–13. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The framework has been widely applied, tested, reviewed and refined.”
§ PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice > Conclusions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The authors state this as an assumption.
Successful implementation can be primarily specified as the achievement of implementation/project goals.
“In our revised, i-PARIHS framework, successful implementation is primarily specified in terms of the achievement of implementation/project goals and results from the facilitation of an innovation with the recipients in their (local, organisational and health system) context (Table 2).”
The paper relies on this without support.
Implementation of evidence into practice is a complex, multi-dimensional process.
“PARIHS was one of the first frameworks to make explicit the multi-dimensional and complex nature of implementation as well as highlighting the central importance of context.”
Citations
Cites
Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation.
Bloch, M. E. F., Lave, J., & Wenger, É. (1994) · Man · doi:10.2307/2804509 · Cited by 39,362
Rogers, E. M., Singhal, A., & Quinlan, M. M. (2019) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203710753-35 · Cited by 37,670
Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511815355 · Cited by 35,324
(1983) · Cited by 33,192
(1999) · Cited by 28,356
Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity
Wenger, E. (1998) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511803932 · Cited by 23,500
Valente, T. W. (2003) · Genetics in Medicine · doi:10.1097/01.gim.0000061743.67794.c4 · Cited by 20,559
The fifth discipline, the art and practice of the learning organization
Senge, P. M. (1991) · Performance + Instruction · doi:10.1002/pfi.4170300510 · Cited by 20,060
Damschroder, L. J., Aron, D. C., Keith, R. E., Kirsh, S. R., Alexander, J. A., & Lowery, J. C. (2009) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-4-50 · Cited by 14,496
Organizational Culture and Leadership
Tierney, W. G., & Schein, E. H. (1986) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258322 · Cited by 9,614
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Hargreaves D. Creative professionalism: the role of teachers in the knowledge society. London: Demos; 1998.
- Royal College of Nursing. Quality patient care: the dynamic standard setting system. Scutari: Harrow; 1990.
- Heron J. The facilitator’s handbook. London: Kogan Page; 1989.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Implementation science: What is it and why should I care?
Bauer, M. S., & Kirchner, J. (2020) · Psychiatry Research · doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2019.04.025 · Cited by 1,167
Nilsen, P., & Bernhardsson, S. (2019) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-019-4015-3 · Cited by 1,014
Understanding and applying the RE-AIM framework: Clarifications and resources
Holtrop, J. S., Estabrooks, P. A., Gaglio, B., Harden, S. M., Kessler, R. S., King, D. K., Kwan, B. M., Ory, M. G., Rabin, B. A., Shelton, R. C., et al. (2021) · Journal of Clinical and Translational Science · doi:10.1017/cts.2021.789 · Cited by 549
Woodward, E. N., Matthieu, M. M., Uchendu, U. S., Rogal, S. S., & Kirchner, J. E. (2019) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-019-0861-y · Cited by 491
“Therefore, using two widely accepted conceptual frameworks—one from implementation science [18] and one from healthcare disparities [35]—we propose and apply the Health Equity Implementation Framework to assess its feasibility.”
Li, S.-A., Jeffs, L., Barwick, M., & Stevens, B. (2018) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/s13643-018-0734-5 · Cited by 433
“The relationship between implementation outcomes and context have been described in implementation theories, models, and frameworks including Rogers’ diffusion of innovations theory [17]; the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research framework (CFIR) [18]; the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sus…”
MethodPerry, C. K., Damschroder, L. J., Hemler, J. R., Woodson, T. T., Ono, S. S., & Cohen, D. J. (2019) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-019-0876-4 · Cited by 288
Stover, A. M., Haverman, L., van Oers, H. A., Greenhalgh, J., Potter, C., Ahmed, S., Greenhalgh, J., Gibbons, E. J., Haverman, L., Manalili, K., et al. (2020) · Quality of Life Research · doi:10.1007/s11136-020-02564-9 · Cited by 313
“In its most recent development [40], i-PARIHS’ three multilevel predictors include: (1) the innovation (ways stakeholders perceive and adapt innovations like PROMs/ PREMs to align with local priorities); (2) recipients (how individuals and communities of practice influence uptake of new knowledge in clinics); and (3)…”
BackgroundDelivering transformative action in paediatric pain: a Lancet Child & Adolescent Health Commission
Eccleston, C., Fisher, E., Howard, R. F., Slater, R., Forgeron, P. A., Palermo, T. M., Birnie, K. A., Anderson, B. J., Chambers, C. T., Crombez, G., et al. (2020) · The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health · doi:10.1016/s2352-4642(20)30277-7 · Cited by 361
Harnessing the power of theorising in implementation science
Kislov, R., Pope, C., Martin, G. P., & Wilson, P. M. (2019) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-019-0957-4 · Cited by 289
“Interestingly, this dynamic approach is apparent in the development of NPT and PARIHS, both of which have evolved significantly in response to empirical verification and conceptual critique [15, 30].”
Getting a clinical innovation into practice: An introduction to implementation strategies
Kirchner, J. E., Smith, J. L., Powell, B. J., Waltz, T. J., & Proctor, E. K. (2019) · Psychiatry Research · doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2019.06.042 · Cited by 280
“The study was guided by the ‘Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services’ (PARIHS) framework (an earlier version of the iPARIHS framework described above) (Harvey and Kitson, 2016).”
BackgroundMethodWoodward, E. N., Singh, R. S., Ndebele‐Ngwenya, P., Castillo, A. M., Dickson, K. S., & Kirchner, J. E. (2021) · Implementation Science Communications · doi:10.1186/s43058-021-00146-5 · Cited by 284
“(healthcare system) [26]: • Policy drivers and priorities • Incentives and mandates • Regulatory frameworks or external accreditation systems • Inter-organizational networks and relationships terms of resources, culture, leadership, and orientation to evaluation and learning.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialLynch, E. A., Mudge, A., Knowles, S., Kitson, A., Hunter, S., & Harvey, G. (2018) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-018-3671-z · Cited by 178
“Revised to integrated or i-PARIHS framework in 2015 [10]”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSelf-citationUsing Complexity and Network Concepts to Inform Healthcare Knowledge Translation
Kitson, A. A., Brook, A. H., Harvey, G., Jordan, Z., Marshall, R. J., O’Shea, R., & Wilson, D. (2017) · International Journal of Health Policy and Management · doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2017.79 · Cited by 203
“33 This preliminary mapping work, along with previous experience in the KT space 8,24,33-36 encouraged us to conceptualize KT as a multidimensional, dynamic, complex, integrated process.”
Self-citationThe effectiveness of champions in implementing innovations in health care: a systematic review
Santos, W. J., Graham, I. D., Lalonde, M., Demery Varin, M., & Squires, J. E. (2022) · Implementation Science Communications · doi:10.1186/s43058-022-00315-0 · Cited by 205
“Best practice and technology can be defined as an innovation [3, 4].”
BackgroundDopp, A. R., Parisi, K. E., Munson, S. A., & Lyon, A. R. (2020) · Implementation Science Communications · doi:10.1186/s43058-020-00020-w · Cited by 180
“In keeping with key implementation frameworks [10, 36], the expert panel identified clusters of implementation strategies that addressed intra- and inter-organizational contexts (“access resources,” “incentivize the innovation”), EBP providers (“support providers”), or the implementation process itself (“monitor chang…”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialJames, H. M., Papoutsi, C., Wherton, J., Greenhalgh, T., & Shaw, S. E. (2021) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/23775 · Cited by 164
Greenhalgh, T., Rosen, R., Shaw, S. E., Byng, R., Faulkner, S., Finlay, T., Grundy, E., Husain, L., Hughes, G., Leone, C., et al. (2021) · Frontiers in Digital Health · doi:10.3389/fdgth.2021.726095 · Cited by 173
“There are theoretical parallels with other complexity-informed implementation and evaluation frameworks including i-PARIHS (22), normalization process theory (23), and the consolidated framework for implementation research (24).”
BackgroundConnolly, S. L., Stolzmann, K. L., Heyworth, L. K., Weaver, K. R., Bauer, M. S., & Miller, C. J. (2020) · Telemedicine Journal and e-Health · doi:10.1089/tmj.2020.0233 · Cited by 171
Hawk, K. F., D’Onofrio, G., Chawarski, M. C., O’Connor, P. G., Cowan, E. A., Lyons, M. S., Richardson, L. D., Rothman, R. E., Whiteside, L., Owens, P. H., et al. (2020) · JAMA Network Open · doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.4561 · Cited by 182
Bullock, H. L., Lavis, J. N., Wilson, M. G., Mulvale, G. M., & Miatello, A. (2021) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-021-01082-7 · Cited by 191
Shelton, R. C., Lee, M., Brotzman, L., Wolfenden, L., Nathan, N., & Wainberg, M. L. (2020) · International Journal of Behavioral Medicine · doi:10.1007/s12529-020-09848-x · Cited by 148
“, providers, clinics, organizations), often with a focus on real-world generalizability [11, 42, 46, 47].”
BackgroundBergström, A., Ehrenberg, A., Eldh, A. C., Graham, I. D., Gustafsson, K., Harvey, G., Hunter, S. C., Kitson, A. A., Rycroft‐Malone, J., & Wallin, L. (2020) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-020-01003-0 · Cited by 170
“, [318, 359, 367, 374, 382]), and informing education and learning and teaching initiatives [144, 372].”
BackgroundSelf-citationCore knowledge translation competencies: a scoping review
Mallidou, A. A., Atherton, P., Chan, L., Frisch, N. C., Glegg, S., & Scarrow, G. (2018) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-018-3314-4 · Cited by 135
“Harvey G, Kitson A. PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice.”
BackgroundInfluentialDryden‐Palmer, K., Parshuram, C. S., & Berta, W. B. (2020) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-020-4935-y · Cited by 133
“the main constructs of evidence, context, facilitation and recipients [3].”
BackgroundMethodPorritt, K. A., McArthur, A., Lockwood, C. S., & Munn, Z. (2022) · International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare · doi:10.1097/xeb.0000000000000361 · Cited by 153
The R2C2 Model in Residency Education: How Does It Foster Coaching and Promote Feedback Use?
Sargeant, J., Lockyer, J. M., Mann, K., Armson, H., Warren, A., Zetkulic, M., Soklaridis, S., Könings, K. D., Ross, K., Silver, I., et al. (2018) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000002131 · Cited by 148
Melnyk, B. M., Tan, A., Hsieh, A. P., & Gallagher‐Ford, L. (2021) · Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing · doi:10.1111/wvn.12524 · Cited by 146
Crable, E. L., Lengnick‐Hall, R., Stadnick, N. A., Moullin, J. C., & Aarons, G. A. (2022) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-022-01256-x · Cited by 124
“In other TMFs, researchers can specify policy within the innovation [49, 58], evidence [59], or intervention”
BackgroundMethodDopp, A. R., Parisi, K. E., Munson, S. A., & Lyon, A. R. (2019) · Health Research Policy and Systems · doi:10.1186/s12961-018-0403-0 · Cited by 129
Davis, M. M., Freeman, M., Shannon, J., Coronado, G. D., Stange, K. C., Guise, J., Wheeler, S. B., & Buckley, D. (2018) · BMC Cancer · doi:10.1186/s12885-017-3813-4 · Cited by 126
“The authors appreciate the input of our Technical Expert Panel Members (which includes national experts and regional primary care and health system stakeholders): Jonathan Tobin, PhD – President/CEO of Clinical Directors Network, Inc. (CDN) and Co-Director, Community Engaged Research Core, The Rockefeller University C…”
BackgroundWang, G., Wong, E., Nilsen, P., Chung, V., Tian, Y., & Yeoh, E. (2023) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-023-01296-x · Cited by 125
CPD of the future: a partnership between quality improvement and competency‐based education
Sargeant, J. M., Wong, B. M., & Campbell, C. M. (2017) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/medu.13407 · Cited by 133
Waldén, M., Mountjoy, M. L., McCall, A., Serner, A., Massey, A., Tol, J. L., Bahr, R., D’Hooghe, M., Bittencourt, N. F. N., Villa, F. D., et al. (2023) · British Journal of Sports Medicine · doi:10.1136/bjsports-2022-106405 · Cited by 129
“40 In addition, the identification of implementation principles and having a communication strategy for the preimplementation, implementation and postimplementation phases are recommended.”
Digital Clinics and Mobile Technology Implementation for Mental Health Care
Connolly, S. L., Kuhn, E. R., Possemato, K., & Torous, J. B. (2021) · Current Psychiatry Reports · doi:10.1007/s11920-021-01254-8 · Cited by 106
Nilsén, P., Ingvarsson, S., Hasson, H., Schwarz, U. V. T., & Augustsson, H. (2020) · Implementation Research and Practice · doi:10.1177/2633489520953762 · Cited by 100
“…success have been described in numerous so-called determinant frameworks, for example, Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) (Damschroder et al., 2009) and the integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) (Harvey & Kitson, 2016).”
MethodFrom novice to expert: a qualitative study of implementation facilitation skills
Ritchie, M. J., Parker, L. E., & Kirchner, J. E. (2020) · Implementation Science Communications · doi:10.1186/s43058-020-00006-8 · Cited by 94
“framework developers suggest a model for transferring skills that involves a network of facilitators so that novices can be mentored and supported by peers and more experienced facilitators [61], they do not provide infor-”
BackgroundDefining the external implementation context: an integrative systematic literature review
Watson, D. P., Adams, E. L., Shue, S. A., Coates, H., McGuire, A. B., Chesher, J., Jackson, J. R., & Omenka, O. I. (2018) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-018-3046-5 · Cited by 111
“Furthermore, the revised i-PARiHS (for which the original version did not consider the external context [26]) is focused explicitly on the health system (as opposed to the broader community) as its external context [6].”
BackgroundInfluentialAshish, K. C., Ewald, U., Basnet, O., Gurung, A., Pyakuryal, S. N., Jha, B. K., Bergström, A., Eriksson, L., Paudel, P., Karki, S., et al. (2019) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1002900 · Cited by 88
“Secondly, in-hospital facilitators were appointed by the management and trained to lead the QI process and facilitate delivery staff (meso- and microlevel) [30].”
Moore, D. C., Payne, S. A., den Block, L. V., Ling, J., Froggatt, K. A., Gatsolaeva, Y., Honinx, E., Pivodic, L., Miranda, R., Onwuteaka-Philipsen, B. D., et al. (2020) · Palliative Medicine · doi:10.1177/0269216319893635 · Cited by 97
Implementation Science: Application of Evidence‐Based Practice Models to Improve Healthcare Quality
Tucker, S., McNett, M., Melnyk, B. M., Hanrahan, K., Hunter, S. C., Kim, B., Cullen, L., & Kitson, A. A. (2021) · Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing · doi:10.1111/wvn.12495 · Cited by 97
Self-citationBartlett, J. D., & Drust, B. (2020) · European Journal of Sport Science · doi:10.1080/17461391.2020.1842511 · Cited by 91
“…complex, diverse and challenging as professional sport, a number of frameworks and guidelines exist to support KT from bench side to bed side to community (Harvey & Kitson, 2015; Rycroft-Malone, 2004), thus posing the question of why there are no KT frameworks specific to professional sport.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialWherton, J. P., Greenhalgh, T., & Shaw, S. E. (2021) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/31374 · Cited by 83
“Other system-focused frameworks such as i-PARIHS (integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services) take a similar though not identical approach [66].”
Hunter, S. C., Kim, B., Mudge, A., Hall, L., Young, A., McRae, P., & Kitson, A. A. (2020) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-020-05354-8 · Cited by 85
Self-citationConnolly, S. L., Hogan, T. P., Shimada, S. L., & Miller, C. J. (2020) · Journal of Technology in Behavioral Science · doi:10.1007/s41347-020-00165-4 · Cited by 78
Barriers and drivers to stakeholder engagement in global mental health projects
Murphy, J., Qureshi, O., Endale, T., Esponda, G. M., Pathare, S., Eaton, J., Silva, M. J. D., & Ryan, G. K. (2021) · International Journal of Mental Health Systems · doi:10.1186/s13033-021-00458-y · Cited by 81
“The integrated-Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) framework [37], for example, identifies facilitation as the central mechanism for promoting implementation, including via the engagement and ongoing support of external (e.”
Mudge, A., McRae, P., Banks, M., Blackberry, I., Barrimore, S. E., Endacott, J., Graves, N., Green, T., Harvey, G., Hubbard, R. E., et al. (2022) · JAMA Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2021.7556 · Cited by 82
Self-citationKilbourne, A. M., Geng, E., Eshun-Wilson, I., Sweeney, S., Shelley, D., Cohen, D. J., Kirchner, J. E., Fernandez, M. E., & Parchman, M. L. (2023) · Implementation Science Communications · doi:10.1186/s43058-023-00435-1 · Cited by 75
Norris, J. M., White, D. E., Nowell, L., Mrklas, K., & Stelfox, H. (2017) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-017-0625-5 · Cited by 82
“Output i-PARIHS [80] Outcome: successful implementation “Individuals, teams and stakeholders are engaged, motivated and ‘own’ the innovation” (p.”
BackgroundGifford, W., Graham, I. D., Ehrhart, M. G., Davies, B., & Aarons, G. A. (2017) · Journal of Healthcare Leadership · doi:10.2147/jhl.s125558 · Cited by 91
“Recent work on the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) theoretical framework identifies leadership and management support as key factors of the inner organizational context for influencing the implementation of EBP in health care.(23) Although research has identified many leadership…”
von Vogelsang, A., Swenne, C. L., Gustafsson, B. Å., & Falk‐Brynhildsen, K. (2019) · Nursing Open · doi:10.1002/nop2.424 · Cited by 83
Nooraie, R. Y., Kwan, B. M., Cohn, E. G., AuYoung, M., Roberts, M. C., Adsul, P., & Shelton, R. C. (2020) · Journal of Clinical and Translational Science · doi:10.1017/cts.2020.10 · Cited by 74
“” While the complex and embedded nature of context is reflected in the implementation frameworks like The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR [6]), integrated-Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS [7]), Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS…”
BackgroundBoyle, L. D., Husebo, B. S., & Vislapuu, M. (2022) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-022-08968-2 · Cited by 104
“Harvey and Kitson describe the evolution of the PARIHS framework to the now revised I-PARIHS framework and state that it “was developed in an attempt to represent the dynamic and multi-faceted nature of implementation in healthcare” [82].”
Evidence-based nursing implementation in Mainland China: A scoping review
Cheng, L., Feng, S., & Hu, Y. (2016) · Nursing Outlook · doi:10.1016/j.outlook.2016.07.016 · Cited by 68
Implementation frameworks in child, youth and family services – Results from a scoping review
Albers, B., Mildon, R. L., Lyon, A. R., & Shlonsky, A. (2017) · Children and Youth Services Review · doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2017.07.003 · Cited by 79
“…Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARiHS) framework has gained considerable attention and use in the health sector (Harvey & Kitson, 2016; Helfrich et al., 2010; Kitson et al., 2008; Rycroft-Malone, 2004; Stetler, Damschroder, Helfrich, & Hagedorn, 2011) but is not…”
BackgroundA Systematic Review of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Acute Procedural Pain on Neonates
Balice‐Bourgois, C., Shaha, M., Vanoni, F., Jaques, C., Newman, C. J., & Simonetti, G. D. (2020) · Clinical Journal of Pain · doi:10.1097/ajp.0000000000000808 · Cited by 76
Advancing the evaluation of integrated knowledge translation
Kreindler, S. A. (2018) · Health Research Policy and Systems · doi:10.1186/s12961-018-0383-0 · Cited by 65
Grounding implementation science in health equity for cancer prevention and control
Adsul, P., Chambers, D., Brandt, H. M., Fernández, M. E., Ramanadhan, S., Torres, E., Leeman, J., Baquero, B. I., Fleisher, L. G., Escoffery, C., et al. (2022) · Implementation Science Communications · doi:10.1186/s43058-022-00311-4 · Cited by 69
“, Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research [51], Theoretical Domain Framework [55], and the integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services framework [56]) provide a specific definition of context [57], but without an explicit consideration for social and structural determinants of…”
Prihodová, L., Guérin, S., Tunney, C., & Kernohan, G. W. (2018) · Journal of Advanced Nursing · doi:10.1111/jan.13836 · Cited by 73
“While in‐depth analysis of the search terms is beyond the scope of this review, many of the recent studies were based on refining of existing models and clarifying the ways of using them in the process of implementation, e.g., Harvey & Kitson, 2016.”
MethodCooke, L., Duncan, D., Rivera, L., Dowling, S. K., Symonds, C. J., & Armson, H. (2018) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-018-0829-3 · Cited by 65
Harvey, G., Gifford, W., Cummings, G. G., Kelly, J., Kislov, R., Kitson, A. A., Pettersson, L., Wallin, L., Wilson, P. M., & Ehrenberg, A. (2018) · International Journal of Nursing Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2018.09.017 · Cited by 61
“This highlights the need to take account of wider policy 525 influences, beyond the immediate clinical and organisational setting, when considering 526 barriers and enablers of EBP (15,41).”
BackgroundSelf-citationEnabling Continuous Quality Improvement in Practice: The Role and Contribution of Facilitation
Harvey, G., & Lynch, E. A. (2017) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2017.00027 · Cited by 66
“In the widely used Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services framework, facilitation has been defined as the active ingredient that aligns the proposed innovation or improvement to the individuals and teams involved and the context in which they work, thereby enabling successful implementation (25…”
BackgroundMethodSelf-citationGoedken, C. C., Livorsi, D. J., Sauder, M., Weg, M. W. V., Chasco, E. E., Chang, N.-C. N., Perencevich, E. N., & Reisinger, H. S. (2019) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-019-0943-x · Cited by 59
“However, the barriers we found associated with using champions as an implementation strategy are similar to those found in recent work in the area of facilitation as an implementation strategy [36, 37].”
ResultAdvancing digital health equity: Directions for behavioral and social science research
Jaworski, B. K., Hooper, M. W., Aklin, W. M., Jean‐Francois, B., Elwood, W. N., Belis, D., Riley, W. T., & Hunter, C. M. (2022) · Translational Behavioral Medicine · doi:10.1093/tbm/ibac088 · Cited by 62
The complexity of implementation factors in professional pharmacy services
García‐Cárdenas, V., Pérez-Escamilla, B., Fernández-Llimós, F., & Benrimoj, S. I. (2017) · Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy · doi:10.1016/j.sapharm.2017.05.016 · Cited by 65
Cooke, L., Duncan, D., Rivera, L., Dowling, S. K., Symonds, C. J., & Armson, H. (2018) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-018-0796-8 · Cited by 61
Leonard, E., Kock, I. D., & Bam, W. G. (2020) · Evaluation and Program Planning · doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2020.101832 · Cited by 62
Roberts, N. A., Janda, M., Stover, A. M., Alexander, K. E., Wyld, D., & Mudge, A. (2020) · Quality of Life Research · doi:10.1007/s11136-020-02669-1 · Cited by 56
“Consistent with the concept of the Facilitator’s journey [30], the novice Facilitator engaged with a expert Facilitator (AM) and a local multidisciplinary peer group of clinician–implementers for reflection (and peer learning) every 1–2 months during the implementation.”
BackgroundMethodByhoff, E., Garg, A., Pellicer, M., Diaz, Y., Yoon, G. H., Charns, M. P., & Drainoni, M. (2019) · The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine · doi:10.3122/jabfm.2019.03.180276 · Cited by 67
“PARIHS is a conceptual framework that helps explain why implementing evidence into practice may or may not be successful by including the relationship between the evidence, the implementation context (in this case our clinic) and facilitation.(29,30) The semistructured interview guide focused on understanding particip…”
MethodKitson, A. A., Harvey, G., Gifford, W., Hunter, S. C., Kelly, J., Cummings, G. G., Ehrenberg, A., Kislov, R., Pettersson, L., Wallin, L., et al. (2021) · Journal of Advanced Nursing · doi:10.1111/jan.14773 · Cited by 74
Self-citationEisman, A. B., Hutton, D. W., Prosser, L. A., Smith, S. N., & Kilbourne, A. M. (2020) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-020-01069-w · Cited by 50
“Facilitation) is a promising implementation strategy from the integrating Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (iPARIHS) framework that provides ongoing, individualized assistance for program delivery that can help enhance uptake of EBPs such as Life Goals in community clinics(14,15).”
MethodIverson, K. M., Adjognon, O. L., Grillo, A. R., Dichter, M. E., Gutner, C. A., Hamilton, A. B., Stirman, S. W., & Gerber, M. R. (2019) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11606-019-05240-y · Cited by 61
“, recipients in line to adopt the innovation and patients who receive the innovation), and inner and outter contextual factors that inhibit or enable implementation.(21) Sample questions included “What is the process of IPV screening and response in your clinic?” and “What have been challenges to integrating IPV scree…”
BackgroundUnni, E., Coles, T., Lavallee, D. C., Freel, J. A., Roberts, N. A., & Absolom, K. L. (2023) · Quality of Life Research · doi:10.1007/s11136-023-03505-y · Cited by 62
“Based on the integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (iPARHIS) framework [17], participant engagement was initiated by asking all the key stakeholders (e.g., clinical teams, patients, consumer representatives, and other non-clinical teams) the question: What should…”
MethodGurung, R., Jha, A. K., Pyakurel, S., Gurung, A., Litorp, H., Wrammert, J., Jha, B. K., Paudel, P., Rahman, S. M., Malla, H., et al. (2019) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-019-0917-z · Cited by 56
Toivonen, M., Lehtonen, L., Ahlqvist‐Björkroth, S., & Axelin, A. (2019) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-019-4256-1 · Cited by 50
“The process includes both how and by whom the process is facilitated [27].”
BackgroundInfluentialConnolly, S. L., Sullivan, J. L., Ritchie, M. J., Kim, B., Miller, C. J., & Bauer, M. S. (2020) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-020-5011-3 · Cited by 53
Leveraging implementation science to advance antibiotic stewardship practice and research
Livorsi, D. J., Drainoni, M., Reisinger, H. S., Nanda, N., McGregor, J. C., Barlam, T. F., Morris, A. M., & Szymczak, J. E. (2021) · Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology · doi:10.1017/ice.2021.480 · Cited by 50
Hofmeyer, A. T., Kennedy, K. J., & Taylor, R. (2019) · Collegian Journal of the Royal College of Nursing Australia · doi:10.1016/j.colegn.2019.07.001 · Cited by 58
Maben, J., Aunger, J. A., Abrams, R., Wright, J. M., Pearson, M., Westbrook, J. I., Jones, A., & Mannion, R. (2023) · BMC Medicine · doi:10.1186/s12916-023-03102-3 · Cited by 51
“…for changing Behaviour (COM-B) approach [184], implementation science frameworks and theories (e.g. Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), Integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) [185, 186], or Normalisation Process Theory (NPT).”
BackgroundZamantakis, A., Li, D. H., Benbow, N., Smith, J. D., & Mustanski, B. S. (2022) · AIDS and Behavior · doi:10.1007/s10461-022-03943-8 · Cited by 51
“’s (2019) development of a health equity implementation framework, which was constructed from integration and adaptation of the integrated-promoting action on research implementation in health services (i-PARIHS) framework (Harvey and Kitson, 2016) and the health care disparities framework (Kilbourne et al.”
BackgroundBlanco‐Mavillard, I., de Pedro‐Gómez, J. E., Rodríguez-Calero, M. Á., Bennasar‐Veny, M., Parra-García, G., Fernández‐Fernández, I., Hoyos, J. B., Moya‐Suárez, A. B., Sánchez, J. L. C., Ferrer-Cruz, F., et al. (2021) · The Lancet Haematology · doi:10.1016/s2352-3026(21)00206-4 · Cited by 56
Use of the PARIHS Framework for Retrospective and Prospective Implementation Evaluations
Hill, J. N., Guihan, M., Hogan, T. P., et al. (2017) · Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing · doi:10.1111/wvn.12211 · Cited by 45
Development of a qualitative data analysis codebook informed by the i-PARIHS framework
Ritchie, M. J., Drummond, K. L., Smith, B. N., Sullivan, J. L., & Landes, S. J. (2022) · Implementation Science Communications · doi:10.1186/s43058-022-00344-9 · Cited by 51
“, the activities that support and enable implementation) [7, 19].”
BackgroundHagedorn, H., Kenny, M. E., Gordon, A. J., Ackland, P. E., Noorbaloochi, S., Yu, W., & Harris, A. H. S. (2018) · Addiction Science & Clinical Practice · doi:10.1186/s13722-018-0127-z · Cited by 54
Carter, H. E., Lee, X. J., Dwyer, T., et al. (2020) · BMC Geriatrics · doi:10.1186/s12877-020-01904-1 · Cited by 55
“Specialist clinical support and collaboration, grounded in the principles of implementation science through the adoption of the i-PARiHS implementation framework [33].”
BackgroundMelder, A., Robinson, T., McLoughlin, I. P., Iedema, R. A. M., & Teede, H. J. (2020) · Internal Medicine Journal · doi:10.1111/imj.14876 · Cited by 49
Mielke, J., Leppla, L., Valenta, S., Zullig, L. L., Zúñiga, F., Staudacher, S., Teynor, A., & Geest, S. D. (2022) · Implementation Science Communications · doi:10.1186/s43058-022-00354-7 · Cited by 50
“Commonly applied TMFs that incorporate context include the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) [20], the Integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) framework [21], or the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) [22].”
MethodLinkage and retention in HCV care for HIV ‐infected populations: early data from the DAA era
Sacks‐Davis, R., Doyle, J., Rauch, A., Béguelin, C., Pedrana, A. E., Matthews, G. V., Prins, M., van der Valk, M., Klein, M. B., Saeed, S., et al. (2018) · Journal of the International AIDS Society · doi:10.1002/jia2.25051 · Cited by 55
“Data collection tools were informed by relevant constructs from the consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR) [17] and the integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services framework (i-PARIHS; Figure 1) [18].”
BackgroundMethodAlignment in implementation of evidence-based interventions: a scoping review
Lundmark, R., Hasson, H., Richter, A., Khachatryan, E., Åkesson, A., & Eriksson, L. (2021) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-021-01160-w · Cited by 54
“The consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR) [7] was used in two articles [37, 38], and the integrated-promoting action on research implementation in health services (iPARIHS) [39] in another [40].”
MethodNilsén, P., Svedberg, P., Nygren, J., Frideros, M., Johansson, J., & Schueller, S. M. (2022) · Implementation Research and Practice · doi:10.1177/26334895221112033 · Cited by 71
“…Framework of Implementation Research (Damschroder et al., 2009), Promoting Action on Research in Health Services (PARIHS) and integrated-PARIHS (Harvey & Kitson, 2016), Exploration Preparation Implementation Sustainability (Aarons et al., 2011), Theoretical Domains Framework (Michie et al.,…”
MethodKim, B., Sullivan, J. L., Ritchie, M. J., Connolly, S. L., Drummond, K. L., Miller, C. J., Greenan, M. A., & Bauer, M. S. (2019) · Psychiatry Research · doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2019.112520 · Cited by 51
Wilson, P. M., & Kislov, R. (2022) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781009237055 · Cited by 58
Mudge, A., Banks, M., Barnett, A. G., Blackberry, I., Graves, N., Green, T., Harvey, G., Hubbard, R. E., Inouye, S. K., Kurrle, S., et al. (2017) · BMC Geriatrics · doi:10.1186/s12877-016-0399-7 · Cited by 52
“Context and recipients will be evaluated by the local facilitator using the i-PARIHS framework [26], assigning scores from −2 (barrier to program goals) to +2 (enabler) for individual domains (e.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSelf-citationImproving serious illness communication: a qualitative study of clinical culture
Paladino, J., Sanders, J. J., Fromme, E. K., Block, S. D., Jacobsen, J. C., Jackson, V. A., Ritchie, C. S., & Mitchell, S. E. (2023) · BMC Palliative Care · doi:10.1186/s12904-023-01229-x · Cited by 52
“To produce a finalized codebook, the codes emerging from this process were consolidated and organized deductively using the PARIHS framework [18, 23], dividing the coded data into organizational contextual factors (e.”
MethodFavier, M., Greenberg, J. M. S., & Stevens, M. (2018) · International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics · doi:10.1002/ijgo.12676 · Cited by 52
Determinants of an evidence-based practice environment: an interpretive description
Duff, J. S., Cullen, L., Hanrahan, K., & Steelman, V. M. (2020) · Implementation Science Communications · doi:10.1186/s43058-020-00070-0 · Cited by 59
Portnoy, G. A., Haskell, S. G., King, M. W., Maskin, R. M., Gerber, M. R., & Iverson, K. M. (2018) · Women s Health Issues · doi:10.1016/j.whi.2018.04.003 · Cited by 47
D’Onofrio, G., Edelman, E. J., Hawk, K. F., Chawarski, M. C., Pantalon, M. V., Owens, P. H., Martel, S. H., Rothman, R. E., Saheed, M. O., Schwartz, R. P., et al. (2023) · JAMA Network Open · doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.5439 · Cited by 50
Pimentel, C. B., Mills, W. L., Palmer, J. A., Dillon, K., Sullivan, J. L., Wewiorski, N. J., Snow, A. L., Allen, R. S., Hopkins, S. D., & Hartmann, C. W. (2018) · Journal of Nursing Care Quality · doi:10.1097/ncq.0000000000000376 · Cited by 47
“These include the VHA’s implementation facilitation training manual,(19) recent studies(18,29) and foundational papers on facilitation,(15,27) and a relevant implementation framework.(30)”
BackgroundGordon, E. J., Lee, J. J., Kang, R. H., Caicedo, J. C., Holl, J. L., Ladner, D. P., & Shumate, M. (2018) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-018-3151-5 · Cited by 48
Bell, J., Young, A., Hill, J. M., Banks, M., Comans, T. A., Barnes, R., & Keller, H. (2018) · Nutrition & Dietetics · doi:10.1111/1747-0080.12406 · Cited by 48
Metadata
- Authors
- Harvey, G., & Kitson, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Manchester (GB)
- University of Oxford (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Harvey, Gill
- Venue
- Implementation Science
- Published
- 2015-12
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 33-33
- ISSN
- 1748-5908 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4807546
- OpenAlex
- W2306592406
- Cited by
- 1,271
- References
- 103
- Citations by year
- 2026: 115 · 2025: 130 · 2024: 203 · 2023: 166 · 2022: 187 · 2021: 170 · 2020: 115 · 2019: 86 · 2018: 61 · 2017: 33 · 2016: 3
- FWCI
- 59.12
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Implementation Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Flinders Academic Commons (Flinders University) (publishedVersion)
- Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Flinders Academic Commons (Flinders University) (submittedVersion)
- 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
- PARIHS framework, i-PARIHS framework, implementation research, implementation context, implementation facilitation, implementation teams, face and content validity
- MeSH terms
- Delivery of Health Care, Diffusion of Innovation, Translational Research, Biomedical
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-06, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-06 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
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
