Six practical recommendations for improved implementation outcomes reporting

Implementation Science

Jared K. Martin¹  Rebecca J. Phillips²  Alicia C. Bunger²  Donald R. Gerke³  Enola K. Proctor⁴  Rebecca Lengnick-Hall⁵  Julia C. Swanson⁵ 

[1] College of Education & Human Ecology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA;College of Social Work, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA;Graduate School of Social Work, University of Denver, Denver, CO, USA;Shanti Khinduka Distinguished Professor Emerita, The Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, USA;The Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, USA;

关键词: Acceptability;    Adoption;    Appropriateness;    Feasibility;    Fidelity;    Implementation cost;    Penetration;    Sustainability;    Implementation outcome;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s13012-021-01183-3

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundImplementation outcomes research spans an exciting mix of fields, disciplines, and geographical space. Although the number of studies that cite the 2011 taxonomy has expanded considerably, the problem of harmony in describing outcomes persists. This paper revisits that problem by focusing on the clarity of reporting outcomes in studies that examine them. Published recommendations for improved reporting and specification have proven to be an important step in enhancing the rigor of implementation research. We articulate reporting problems in the current implementation outcomes literature and describe six practical recommendations that address them.RecommendationsOur first recommendation is to clearly state each implementation outcome and provide a definition that the study will consistently use. This includes providing an explanation if using the taxonomy in a new way or merging terms. Our second recommendation is to specify how each implementation outcome will be analyzed relative to other constructs. Our third recommendation is to specify “the thing” that each implementation outcome will be measured in relation to. This is especially important if you are concurrently studying interventions and strategies, or if you are studying interventions and strategies that have multiple components. Our fourth recommendation is to report who will provide data and the level at which data will be collected for each implementation outcome, and to report what kind of data will be collected and used to assess each implementation outcome. Our fifth recommendation is to state the number of time points and frequency at which each outcome will be measured. Our sixth recommendation is to state the unit of observation and the level of analysis for each implementation outcome.ConclusionThis paper advances implementation outcomes research in two ways. First, we illustrate elements of the 2011 research agenda with concrete examples drawn from a wide swath of current literature. Second, we provide six pragmatic recommendations for improved reporting. These recommendations are accompanied by an audit worksheet and a list of exemplar articles that researchers can use when designing, conducting, and assessing implementation outcomes studies.

【 授权许可】

CC BY