The DOI matches its Crossref record; 101 of the 101 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Implementability of healthcare interventions: an overview of reviews and development of a conceptual framework
Open accessAbstract
Background: Implementation research may play an important role in reducing research waste by identifying strategies that support translation of evidence into practice. Implementation of healthcare interventions is influenced by multiple factors including the organisational context, implementation strategies and features of the intervention as perceived by people delivering and receiving the intervention. Recently, concepts relating to perceived features of interventions have been gaining traction in published literature, namely, acceptability, fidelity, feasibility, scalability and sustainability. These concepts may influence uptake of healthcare interventions, yet there seems to be little consensus about their nature and impact. The aim of this paper is to develop a testable conceptual framework of implementability of healthcare interventions that includes these five concepts. Methods: A multifaceted approach was used to develop and refine a conceptual framework of implementability of healthcare interventions. An overview of reviews identified reviews published between January 2000 and March 2021 that focused on at least one of the five concepts in relation to a healthcare intervention. These findings informed the development of a preliminary framework of implementability of healthcare interventions which was presented to a panel of experts. A nominal group process was used to critique, refine and agree on a final framework. Results: A total of 252 publications were included in the overview of reviews. Of these, 32% were found to be feasible, 4% reported sustainable changes in practice and 9% were scaled up to other populations and/or settings. The expert panel proposed that scalability and sustainability of a healthcare intervention are dependent on its acceptability, fidelity and feasibility. Furthermore, acceptability, fidelity and feasibility require re-evaluation over time and as the intervention is developed and then implemented in different settings or with different populations. The final agreed framework of implementability provides the basis for a chronological, iterative approach to planning for wide-scale, long-term implementation of healthcare interventions. Conclusions: We recommend that researchers consider the factors acceptability, fidelity and feasibility (proposed to influence sustainability and scalability) during the preliminary phases of intervention development, evaluation and implementation, and iteratively check these factors in different settings and over time.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
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
Proctor, E., Silmere, H., Raghavan, R., Hovmand, P., Aarons, G., Bunger, A., Griffey, R., & Hensley, M. (2011) · Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research · doi:10.1007/s10488-010-0319-7 · Cited by 8,721
Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework.
Glasgow, R. E., Vogt, T. M., & Boles, S. M. (1999) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.89.9.1322 · Cited by 7,217 · cited 1×
“Identifying the factors important for translation of an effective intervention or innovation from the research setting to routine clinical practice can arguably contribute to reducing the estimated annual US$85 billion, globally, wasted in health research [1, 2, 4].”
BackgroundSkivington, K., Matthews, L., Simpson, S. A., Craig, P., Baird, J., Blazeby, J. M., Boyd, K. A., Craig, N., French, D. P., McIntosh, E., et al. (2021) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.n2061 · Cited by 5,808
Cane, J., O’Connor, D., & Michie, S. (2012) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-7-37 · Cited by 4,888
Curran, G. M., Bauer, M., Mittman, B., Pyne, J. M., & Stetler, C. (2012) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/mlr.0b013e3182408812 · Cited by 4,058
How we design feasibility studies
Bowen, D. J., Kreuter, M., Spring, B., Cofta-Woerpel, L., Linnan, L., Weiner, D., Bakken, S., Kaplan, C. P., Squiers, L., Fabrizio, C., et al. (2009) · American Journal of Preventive Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2009.02.002 · Cited by 4,021 · cited 1×
“Five reviews referred to a feasibility framework (Table 4) with the most commonly used being Bowen et al’s publication on designing feasibility studies [76].”
MethodSekhon, M., Cartwright, M., & Francis, J. J. (2017) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-017-2031-8 · Cited by 3,938
Self-citationUpdating guidance for reporting systematic reviews: development of the PRISMA 2020 statement
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., & Moher, D. (2021) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.02.003 · Cited by 3,490
Making psychological theory useful for implementing evidence based practice: a consensus approach
Michie, S. (2005) · Quality and Safety in Health Care · doi:10.1136/qshc.2004.011155 · Cited by 3,440
Cited by
Reflections on 10 years of effectiveness-implementation hybrid studies
Curran, G. M., Landes, S. J., McBain, S. A., Pyne, J. M., Smith, J. D., Fernandez, M. E., Chambers, D. A., & Mittman, B. S. (2022) · Frontiers in Health Services · doi:10.3389/frhs.2022.1053496 · Cited by 299
Sun, L., Booth, A., & Sworn, K. (2024) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-024-01375-7 · Cited by 42
Malone, S., Newland, J., Kudchadkar, S. R., Prewitt, K., McKay, V., Prusaczyk, B., Proctor, E., Brownson, R. C., & Luke, D. A. (2022) · Frontiers in Health Services · doi:10.3389/frhs.2022.1005802 · Cited by 6
Benzies, K. M., Zanoni, P., & McNeil, D. A. (2024) · Implementation Science Communications · doi:10.1186/s43058-024-00644-2 · Cited by 4
Metadata
- Authors
- Klaic, M., Kapp, S., Hudson, P., Chapman, W., Denehy, L., Story, D., & Francis, J. J.
- Venue
- Implementation Science
- Published
- 2022-01-27
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 10-10
- ISSN
- 1748-5908 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4210547802
- Cited by
- 394
- References
- 101
- FWCI
- 79.22
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Implementability of healthcare interventions: an overview of reviews and development of a conceptual framework. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/s13012-021-01171-7
- The paper
- Klaic, M., Kapp, S., Hudson, P., Chapman, W., Denehy, L., Story, D., & Francis, J. J. (2022). Implementability of healthcare interventions: an overview of reviews and development of a conceptual framework. Implementation Science. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-021-01171-7
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
