Cited by 152Health Policy Implementation ScienceInformation Systems Theories and ImplementationElectronic Health Records Systems

The NASSS-CAT Tools for Understanding, Guiding, Monitoring, and Researching Technology Implementation Projects in Health and Social Care: Protocol for an Evaluation Study in Real-World Settings

Open access
Greenhalgh, Trisha, Maylor, Harvey, Shaw, Sara, Wherton, Joseph, Papoutsi, Chrysanthi, Betton, Victoria, Nelissen, Natalie, Gremyr, Andreas +3 more·2020·JMIR Research Protocols

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Background: Projects to implement health care and social care innovations involving technologies are typically ambitious and complex. Many projects fail. Greenhalgh et al’s nonadoption, abandonment, scale-up, spread, and sustainability (NASSS) framework was developed to analyze the varied outcomes of such projects. Objective: We sought to extend the NASSS framework to produce practical tools for understanding, guiding, monitoring, and researching technology projects in health care or social care settings. Methods: Building on NASSS and a complexity assessment tool (CAT), the NASSS-CAT tools were developed (in various formats) in seven co-design workshops involving 50 stakeholders (industry executives, technical designers, policymakers, managers, clinicians, and patients). Using action research, they were and are being tested prospectively on a sample of case studies selected for variety in conditions, technologies, settings, scope and scale, policy context, and project goals. Results: The co-design process resulted in four tools, available as free downloads. NASSS-CAT SHORT is a taster to introduce the instrument and gauge interest. NASSS-CAT LONG is intended to support reflection, due diligence, and preliminary planning. It maps complexity through stakeholder discussion across six domains, using free-text open questions (designed to generate a rich narrative and surface uncertainties and interdependencies) and a closed-question checklist; this version includes an action planning section. NASSS-CAT PROJECT is a 35-item instrument for monitoring how subjective complexity in a technology implementation project changes over time. NASSS-CAT INTERVIEW is a set of prompts for conducting semistructured research or evaluation interviews. Preliminary data from empirical case studies suggest that the NASSS-CAT tools can potentially identify, but cannot always help reconcile, contradictions and conflicts that block projects’ progress. Conclusions: The NASSS-CAT tools are a useful addition to existing implementation tools and frameworks. Further support of the implementation projects is ongoing. We are currently producing digital versions of the tools, and plan (subject to further funding) to establish an online community of practice for people interested in using and improving the tools, and hold workshops for building cross-project collaborations. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/16861

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2196/16861

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

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

  • Related complexity assessment tools (NASSS-CAT) were developed in 2020 to enhance understanding, guide monitoring, and facilitate research on technology projects in healthcare or social care settings through collaborations.

    “Related complexity assessment tools (i.e., NASSS-CAT) were developed in 2020 to enhance understanding, guide monitoring, and facilitate research on technology projects in healthcare or social care settings through collaborations [11].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [37]Official Journal of the European Union EUR-Lex 2011 2020-03-09 DIRECTIVE 2011/62/EU OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 8 June 2011 amending Directive 2001/83/EC on the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use, as regards the prevention of the entry into the legal supply chain of falsified medicinal products https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2011:174:0074:0087:EN:PDF
  2. [43]Krauss O Angermaier M Helm E Bursa M Khuri S Renda ME A literature based process analysis Information Technology in Bio- and Medical Informatics 2016 New York, NY Springer International Publishing 115 29

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Greenhalgh, T., Maylor, H., Shaw, S., Wherton, J., Papoutsi, C., Betton, V., Nelissen, N., Gremyr, A., Rushforth, A., Koshkouei, M., & Taylor, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • Sahlgrenska University Hospital (SE)
Corresponding author
Greenhalgh, Trisha
Venue
JMIR Research Protocols
Published
2020-05-13
Volume
9
Issue
5
Pages
e16861
ISSN
1929-0748 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3024056635
Cited by
152
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 25 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 3
FWCI
9.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JMIR Research Protocols (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (WT104830MA, 104830/Z/14/Z)
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (13/59/26)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
Keywords
NASSS framework, technology implementation, healthcare innovation, social care, implementation complexity, co-design, implementation tools, project monitoring, stakeholder engagement, implementation evaluation, complexity assessment, action planning

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