Advancing the application, quality and harmonization of implementation science measures

Implementation Science

Russell E Glasgow²  Ross C Brownson¹  Enola K Proctor³  Michelle D Henton⁴  Richard P Moser²  Sana Naveed²  Peyton Purcell²  Borsika A Rabin⁴ 

[1] Division of Public Health Sciences and Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University School of Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, Washington, USA;Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD6130 Executive Blvd, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA;George Warren Brown School of Social Work, Washington University in St. Louis, Campus Box 1196, One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO, 63130, USA;CRN Cancer Communication Research Center, Institute for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Colorado, Legacy Highlands Building, 10065 E. Harvard Ave., Suite 300, Denver, Colorado, USA

关键词: Technology-mediated social participation;    Harmonization;    Quality of measurement;    Constructs;    Measures;    Dissemination;    Implementation;   

Others  :  813853
DOI  :  10.1186/1748-5908-7-119

 received in 2012-06-14, accepted in 2012-12-06,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

The field of implementation science (IS) encompasses a broad range of constructs and uses measures from a variety of disciplines. However, there has been little standardization of measures or agreement on definitions of constructs across different studies, fields, authors, or research groups.

Methods

We describe a collaborative, web-based activity using the United States National Cancer Institute’s (NCI) Grid-Enabled Measures (GEM) portal that uses a wiki platform to focus discussion and engage the research community to enhance the quality and harmonization of measures for IS health-related research and practice. We present the history, process, and preliminary data from the GEM Dissemination & Implementation (D&I) Campaign on IS measurement.

Results

The GEM D&I Campaign has been ongoing for eight weeks as of this writing, and has used a combination of expert opinion and crowd-sourcing approaches. To date it has listed definitions for 45 constructs and summarized information on 120 measures. Usage of the website peaked at a rate of 124 views from 89 visitors on week seven. Users from seven countries have contributed measures and/or constructs, shared experience in using different measures, contributed comments, and identified research gaps and needs.

Conclusion

Thus far, this campaign has provided information about different IS measures, their associated characteristics, and comments. The next step is to rate these measures for quality and practicality. This resource and ongoing activity have potential to advance the quality and harmonization of IS measures and constructs, and we invite readers to contribute to the process.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Rabin et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Rogers EM: Diffusion of innovations. 5th edition. New York: Free Press; 2003.
• [2]Eccles MP, Mittman BS: Welcome to implementation science. Implement Sci 2006, 1:1. BioMed Central Full Text
• [3]Chambers D: Foreword. In Dissemination and implementation research in health. First edition. Edited by Brownson RC, Colditz GC, Proctor EK. New York: Oxford University Press; 2012:vii-ix.
• [4]Gaglio B, Glasgow RE: Evaluation approaches for dissemination and implementation research. In Dissemination and implementation research in health: translating science to practice. Edited by Brownson RC, Colditz G, Proctor E. Oxford University Press; In Press.
• [5]Rabin BA, Brownson RC: Developing the terminology for dissemination and implementation research. In Dissemination and implementation research in health. First edition. Edited by Brownson RC, Colditz GC, Proctor EK. New York: Oxford University Press; 2012:23-51.
• [6]Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE, Kirsh SR, Alexander JA, Lowery JC: Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implement Sci 2009, 4:50. BioMed Central Full Text
• [7]Greenhalgh T, Robert G, Macfarlane F, Bate P, Kyriakidou O: Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: systematic review and recommendations. Milbank Q 2004, 82:581-629.
• [8]National Institutes of Health: PA-10-038: dissemination and implementation research in health (R01). 2010.
• [9]U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) VHA, Health Services Research & Development Service and the Diabetes Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI) in Ann Arbor: Welcome to the consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR) wiki. Michigan; Available from: http://wiki.cfirwiki.net/index.php?title=Main_Page webcite, Accessed on December 11, 2012.
• [10]Glisson C, Landsverk J, Schoenwald S, Kelleher K, Hoagwood KE, Mayberg S, Green P: Assessing the organizational social context (OSC) of mental health services: implications for research and practice. Adm Policy Ment Health 2008, 35:98-113.
• [11]Thacker SB: Public health surveillance and the prevention of injuries in sports: what gets measured gets done. J Athl Train 2007, 42:171-172.
• [12]Moser RP, Hesse BW, Shaikh AR, Courtney P, Morgan G, Augustson E, Kobrin S, Levin KY, Helba C, Garner D, et al.: Grid-enabled measures: using Science 2.0 to standardize measures and share data. Am J Prev Med 2011, 40:S134-S143.
• [13]Tabak RG, Khoong EC, Chambers D, Brownson RC: Bridging research and practice: the use of models in dissemination and implementation research. Am J Prev Med 2012, 43(3):337-350.
• [14]Aarons GA, Hurlburt M, Horwitz SM: Advancing a conceptual model of evidence-based practice implementation in public service sectors. Adm Policy Ment Health 2011, 38:4-23.
• [15]Weiner BJ, Belden CM, Bergmire DM, Johnston M: The meaning and measurement of implementation climate. Implement Science 2011, 6:78. BioMed Central Full Text
• [16]Estabrooks PA, Boyle M, Emmons KM, Glasgow RE, Hesse BW, Kaplan RM, Krist AH, Moser RP, Taylor MV: Harmonized patient-reported data elements in the electronic health record: supporting meaningful use by primary care action on health behaviors and key psychosocial factors. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2012, 19(4):575-582.
• [17]Hesse BW: Technology-mediated social participation in health and healthcare. In Technology mediated social participation workshop. Arlington, VA: U.S. National Science Foundation; 2010.
• [18]Nielsen M: Reinventing discovery: the new era of networked science. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 2012.
• [19]Surowiecki J: The wisdom of crowds. New York: Random House; 2005.
• [20]Proctor E, Silmere H, Raghavan R, Hovmand P, Aarons G, Bunger A, Griffey R, Hensley M: Outcomes for implementation research: conceptual distinctions, measurement challenges, and research agenda. Adm Policy Ment Health 2011, 38:65-76.
• [21]Preece J, Shneiderman B: The reader-to-leader framework: motivating technology-mediated social participation. AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction 2009, 1:13-32.
• [22]Glasgow RE, Green LW, Taylor MV, Stange KC: An evidence integration triangle for aligning science with policy and practice. Am J Prev Med 2012, 42:646-654.
• [23]Brownson RC, Colditz GC, Proctor EK (Eds): Dissemination and implementation research in health. First edition. New York: Oxford University Press; 2012.
• [24]Glasgow RE, Vinson C, Chambers D, Khoury MJ, Kaplan RM, Hunter C: National institutes of health approaches to dissemination and implementation science: current and future directions. Am J Public Health 2012, 102(7):1274-1281.