Cited by 448Health Policy Implementation SciencePublic Health Policies and EducationHealth Sciences Research and Education

An Extension of RE-AIM to Enhance Sustainability: Addressing Dynamic Context and Promoting Health Equity Over Time

Open access
Shelton, Rachel C., Chambers, David A., Glasgow, Russell E.·2020·Frontiers in Public Health

Abstract

RE-AIM is a widely adopted, robust implementation science (IS) framework used to inform intervention and implementation design, planning, and evaluation, as well as to address short-term maintenance. In recent years, there has been growing focus on the longer-term sustainability of evidence-based programs, policies and practices (EBIs). In particular, investigators have conceptualized sustainability as the continued health impact and delivery of EBIs over a longer period of time (e.g., years after initial implementation) and incorporated the complex and evolving nature of context. We propose a reconsideration of RE-AIM to integrate recent conceptualizations of sustainability with a focus on addressing dynamic context and promoting health equity. In this Perspective, we present an extension of the RE-AIM framework to guide planning, measurement/evaluation, and adaptations focused on enhancing sustainability. We recommend consideration of: (1) extension of "maintenance" within RE-AIM to include recent conceptualizations of dynamic, longer-term intervention sustainability and "evolvability" across the life cycle of EBIs, including adaptation and potential de-implementation in light of changing and evolving evidence, contexts, and population needs; (2) iterative application of RE-AIM assessments to guide adaptations and enhance long-term sustainability; (3) explicit consideration of equity and cost as fundamental, driving forces that need to be addressed across RE-AIM dimensions to enhance sustainability; and (4) use or integration of RE-AIM with other existing frameworks that address key contextual factors and examine multi-level determinants of sustainability. Finally, we provide testable hypotheses and detailed research questions to inform future research in these areas.

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 · 10.3389/fpubh.2020.00134

Cites

46 of 46 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?

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Shelton, R. C., Chambers, D. A., & Glasgow, R. E.
Affiliations
  • Columbia University (US)
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • VA Eastern Colorado Health Care System (US)
Corresponding author
Shelton, Rachel C.
Venue
Frontiers in Public Health
Published
2020-05-12
Volume
8
Pages
134-134
ISSN
2296-2565 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3024052173
Cited by
448
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 48 · 2025: 69 · 2024: 114 · 2023: 94 · 2022: 67 · 2021: 48 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 1
FWCI
55.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Public Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • American Cancer Society (RSG 17-156-01-CPPB)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
  • National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Public Health Policies and Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Sciences Research and Education
Keywords
RE-AIM framework, dynamic context, health equity, evolvability, intervention adaptation, de-implementation, long-term maintenance, implementation evaluation, cost
MeSH terms
Health Equity, Implementation Science

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