Background
The current project: aims and objectives
-
the number of instruments identified for each of the 48 DIS constructs (including the 13 subconstructs; CFIR and IOF),
-
the rigor underlying instrument development,
-
whether the construct was explicitly defined in the original article,
-
the year and field in which the instrument was created,
-
the stakeholder targeted by the instrument,
-
settings in which the instrument has been used, and
-
the number of published studies reporting use of the instrument (bibliometric data).
Methods
Step 1: defining the scope of the project
Step 2: selecting theoretical frameworks to guide the review
Construct
| Included
| Excluded
| |
---|---|---|---|
CFIR domains | |||
Characteristics of individuals | Knowledge and beliefs about the intervention | X | |
Individual stage of change | X | ||
Individual identification with organization | X | ||
Other personal attributes | X | ||
Self-efficacy | X | ||
Inner setting | Culture | X | |
Implementation climate (IC) | X | ||
IC: tension for changea
| X | ||
IC: compatibilitya
| X | ||
IC: relative prioritya
| X | ||
IC: organizational incentives and rewardsa
| X | ||
IC: goals and feedbacka
| X | ||
IC: learning climatea
| X | ||
Networks and communications | X | ||
Readiness for implementation (RI) | X | ||
RI: leadership engagementa
| X | ||
RI: available resourcesa
| X | ||
RI: access to knowledge and informationa
| X | ||
Structural characteristics | X | ||
Intervention characteristics | Adaptability | X | |
Complexity | X | ||
Cost | X | ||
Design quality and packaging | X | ||
Evidence strength and quality | X | ||
Intervention source | X | ||
Relative advantage | X | ||
Trialability | X | ||
Outer setting | Cosmopolitanism | X | |
External policy and incentives | X | ||
Patient needs and resources | X | ||
Peer pressure | X | ||
Process | Engaging | X | |
Engaging: opinion leadersa
| X | ||
Engaging: formally appointed internala
| X | ||
Implementation leadersa
| |||
Engaging: championsa
| X | ||
Engaging: external change agentsa
| X | ||
Executing | X | ||
Planning | X | ||
Reflecting and evaluating | X | ||
Implementation outcomes framework | |||
Service outcomes | Effectiveness | X | |
Efficiency | X | ||
Equity | X | ||
Patient-centeredness | X | ||
Safety | X | ||
Timeliness | X | ||
Client outcomes | Function | X | |
Satisfaction | X | ||
Symptomology | X | ||
Implementation outcomes | Acceptability | X | |
Adoption | X | ||
Appropriateness | X | ||
Cost | X | ||
Feasibility | X | ||
Fidelity | X | ||
Penetration | X | ||
Sustainability | X | ||
Total | 48 | 8 |
Step 3: generating a search protocol for the literature review of constructs
Step 4: the literature review of specific instruments—extending beyond a systematic review
Step 5: development of the evidence-based assessment rating criteria
Criterion
| Description
|
---|---|
Reliability information | |
0 | None (N): α values are not yet available or are only available for subscales |
1 | Minimal/emerging (M): α values of <0.60 |
2 | Adequate (A): α values of 0.60–0.69 |
3 | Good (G): α values of 0.70–0.79 |
4 | Excellent (E): α values of ≥0.80 |
NA | Internal consistency measures are not applicable for this measure or classical test theory anchors are not appropriate, results reported using item response theory |
Structural validity | |
0 | None (N): no exploratory or confirmatory analysis has yet been performed nor any Item Response Theory tests of (uni-)dimensionality have been conducted, or percent variance explained is not reported |
1 | Minimal/emerging (M): the sample consisted of less than five times the number of items and an exploratory factor analysis explained less than 25% of the variance |
2 | Adequate (A): the sample consisted of less than five times the number of items but is less than 100 in total and an exploratory factor analysis explained less than 50% of the variance or a confirmatory factor analysis revealed an RMSEA of 0.08 to 0.05 or CFI = 0.90 to 0.95 |
3 | Good (G): the sample consisted of five times the number of items and is greater than or equal to 100 in total or the sample consisted of five to seven times the number of items but is less than 100 in total and in either case an exploratory factor analysis explained less than 50% of the variance or a confirmatory factor analysis revealed an RMSEA of 0.05 to 0.03 or CFI = 0.95 to 0.97 |
4 | Excellent (E): the sample consisted of seven times the number of items and is greater than 100 in total and an exploratory analysis explained greater than 50% of the variance or a confirmatory factor analysis revealed an RMSEA of <0.03 or CFI > 0.97 |
Criterion (predictive) validity information | |
0 | None (N): predictive validity not yet tested or failed to be detected in evaluation |
1 | Minimal/emerging (M): evidence of small correlation (α range: 0.10 to 0.29) between measure and scores on another test (measuring a distinct construct of interest or outcome) administered at some point in the future |
2 | Adequate (A): evidence of medium correlation (α range: 0.30 to 0.49) between measure and scores on another test (measuring a distinct construct of interest or outcome) administered at some point in the future |
3 | Good (G): evidence of strong correlation (α range: 0.50 to 1.00) between measure and scores on another test (measuring a distinct construct of interest or outcome) administered at some point in the future |
4 | Excellent (E): evidence of medium-strong correlation (α range: 0.30 or higher) between measure and scores on at least two other tests (measuring a distinct construct of interest or outcome) administered at some point in the future |
Norms | |
0 | None (N) none: norms are not yet available |
1 | Minimal/emerging (M): measures of central tendency and distribution for the total score (and subscales if relevant) based only on a small (n < 30) sample are available |
2 | Adequate (A): measures of central tendency and distribution for the total score (and subscales if relevant) based on a moderate (n = 30–49) sample are available |
3 | Good (G): measures of central tendency and distribution for the total score (and subscales if relevant) based on a medium (n = 50–99) sample are available |
4 | Excellent (E): measures of central tendency and distribution for the total score (and subscales if relevant) based on a large (n > 100) sample are available |
Responsiveness (sensitivity to change) | |
0 | None (N): the measure has either not been administered both pre- and post-implementation to evaluate sensitivity to change or it has been administered and it did not demonstrate responsiveness (change) across an implementation process |
1 | Minimal/emerging (M): the measure demonstrated change over time based on a small (n < 50) sample |
2 | Adequate (A): the measure demonstrated either clinically or statistically significant change over time based on a medium sample (n > 50 but <100) |
3 | Good (G): the measure demonstrated change over time reflective of both clinically and statistically significant change based on a large sample (n > 100) |
4 | Excellent (E): the measure demonstrated both clinically and statistically significant change over time based on at least two large (n > 100) samples |
Usability (measure length) | |
0 | None (N): the measure is not in the public domain |
1 | Minimal (M): the measure has greater than 100 items |
2 | Adequate (A): the measure has greater than 50 items but fewer than 100 |
3 | Good (G): the measure has greater than 10 items but fewer than 50 |
4 | Excellent (E): the measure has fewer than 10 items |
Step 6: data extraction and rating instruments
Step 7: population of the website repository
Preliminary results and discussion
Preliminary results
Domain
| Construct
| Instruments per construct
| Stage of dev.
| Stage of dev.
| Percentage of instruments with definition
| Number of articles in packet
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
N
| M
| Mode
| N(%)
| M(SD)
| ||
Implementation outcomes | Acceptability | 46 | 3.11 | 4 | 33 (71.74%) | 4.41 (4.11) |
Adoption | 24 | 3.58 | 1 | 21 (87.50%) | 1.58 (1.52) | |
Appropriateness | 7 | 1.00 | 1 | 3 (42.86%) | 1.29 (1.10) | |
Feasibility | 14 | 1.00 | 1 | 6 (42.86%) | 1.57 (1.46) | |
Penetration | 5 | 2.40 | 1 | 5 (100%) | 2.60 (2.08) | |
Sustainability | 9 | 2.44 | 1 | 6 (66.67%) | 1.67 (1.48) | |
Total | 105 | 74 | ||||
Average | 17.5 | 2.26 | 1 | 70.48% | 2.19 (1.96) | |
Intervention characteristics | Adaptability | 1 | 4.00 | 1, 2, 3, 4 | 1 (100%) | 1.00 (1.00) |
Complexity | 4 | 3.50 | 1 | 3 (75.00%) | 1.00 (0.75) | |
Design quality and packaging | 0 | 0.00 | 0 | 0 (0.00%) | 0.00 (0.00) | |
Evidence strength and quality | 4 | 1.75 | 1 | 3 (75.00%) | 1.00 (0.75) | |
Intervention source | 0 | 0.00 | 0 | 0 (0.00%) | 0.00 (0.00) | |
Relative advantage | 7 | 2.43 | 1 | 5 (71.43%) | 1.00 (0.71) | |
Trialability | 3 | 4.00 | 1, 6, 7, 8 | 2 (66.67%) | 1.00 (0.67) | |
Total | 19 | 14 | ||||
Average | 2.71 | 2.24 | 1 | 73.68% | 0.71 (0.55) | |
Outer setting | Cosmopolitanism | 1 | 3.00 | 2, 6, 8 | 0 (0.00%) | 4.00 (0.00) |
External policy and incentives | 0 | 0.00 | 0 | 0 (0.00%) | 0.00 (0.00) | |
Patient needs and resources | 3 | 4.67 | 6 | 2 (66.67%) | 1.00 (0.67) | |
Peer pressure | 0 | 0.00 | 0 | 0 (0.00%) | 0.00 (0.00) | |
Total | 4 | 2 | ||||
Average | 1 | 1.92 | 6 | 50.00% | 1.25 (0.17) | |
Inner setting | Combined | 9 | 4.44 | 1 | 8 (88.89%) | 9.22 (8.20) |
Culture | 10 | 5.00 | 1 | 10 (100%) | 4.44 (3.95) | |
Implementation climate (IC) | 15 | 5.60 | 1 | 14 (93.33%) | 6.93 (6.47) | |
IC: tension for change | 0 | 0.00 | 0 | 0 (0.00%) | 0.00 (0.00) | |
IC: compatibility | 1 | 8.00 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 | 1 (100%) | 11.00 (0.00) | |
IC: relative priority | 1 | 2.00 | 1 and 6 | 1 (100%) | 3.00 (0.00) | |
IC: organizational incentives and rewards | 4 | 5.75 | 1,6,7,8 | 4 (100%) | 3.00 (2.25) | |
IC: goals and feedback | 0 | 0.00 | 0 | 0 (0.00%) | 0.00 (0.00) | |
IC: learning climate | 14 | 4.64 | 1 | 14 (100%) | 9.29 (8.62) | |
Networks and communications | 11 | 4.36 | 1 | 9 (81.82%) | 5.17 (4.40) | |
Readiness for implementation (RI) | 16 | 3.38 | 1 | 13 (81.25%) | 2.74 (2.59) | |
RI: leadership engagement | 4 | 5.75 | 1, 6, 7, 8 | 4 (100%) | 4.50 (3.38) | |
RI: available resources | 2 | 3.00 | 1, 6 | 2 (100%) | 2.50 (1.25) | |
RI: access to knowledge and information | 1 | 8.00 | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 | 1 (100%) | 7.00 (0.00) | |
Structural characteristics | 2 | 3.50 | 1, 6 | 2 (100%) | 7.50 (3.75) | |
Total | 90 | 83 | ||||
Average | 6.00 | 4.23 | 1 | 92.22% | 5.09 (2.99) | |
Characteristics of individuals | Knowledge and beliefs about the intervention | 52 | 3.84 | 2 | 31 (5.36%) | 4.48 (4.40) |
Individual stage of change | 6 | 2.83 | 1 | 5 (83.33%) | 3.00 (2.50) | |
Individual identification with the organization | 4 | 3.50 | 1, 4 | 3 (16.67%) | 2.83 (2.36) | |
Other personal attributes | 34 | 2.65 | 1 | 27 (5.26%) | 3.89 (3.79) | |
Self-Efficacy | 4 | 3.75 | 1 | 4 (100%) | 2.75 (2.06) | |
Total | 98 | 70 | ||||
Average | 19.6 | 3.31 | 2 | 71.43% | 3.39 (3.02) | |
Process | Engaging | 0 | 0.00 | 0 | 0 (0.00%) | 1.00 (0.00) |
Engaging: opinion leaders | 0 | 0.00 | 0 | 0 (0.00%) | 5.67 (3.78) | |
Engaging: formally appointed internal implementation leaders | 0 | 0.00 | 0 | 0 (0.00%) | 0.00 (0.00) | |
Engaging: champions | 0 | 0.00 | 0 | 0 (0.00%) | 0.00 (0.00) | |
Engaging: external change agents | 1 | 7.00 | 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8 | 1 (100%) | 10.00 (0.00) | |
Executing | 1 | 5.00 | 1, 2, 6, 7, 8 | 1 (100%) | 2.00 (0.00) | |
Planning | 21 | 2.14 | 1 | 13 (61.90%) | 7.25 (6.99) | |
Reflecting and evaluating | 20 | 0.03 | 0 | 9 (45.00%) | 2.70 (2.22) | |
Total | 54 | 24 | ||||
Average | 6.75 | 1.77 | 1 | 44.44% | 3.58 (1.62) | |
Client outcomes | Satisfaction | 10 | 2.80 | 1, 3, 4, 5 | 4 (40.00%) | 4.43 (4.11) |
Domain
| Construct
| Education
| Psychology
| IT
| Public health
| Medicine
| Organizational
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Implementation outcomes | Acceptability | 8 (18.61%) | 29 (67.44%) | 1 (2.33%) | 3 (6.98%) | 2 (4.65%) | 0 (0.00%) |
Adoption | 5 (33.33%) | 5 (33.33%) | 1 (6.67%) | 3 (20.00%) | 1 (6.67%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Appropriateness | 0 (0.00%) | 3 (60.00%) | 1 (20.00%) | 1 (20.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Feasibility | 1 (9.09%) | 7 (63.64%) | 0 (0.00%) | 3 (27.27%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Penetration | 0 (0.00%) | 2 (40.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 3 (60.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Sustainability | 0 (0.00%) | 1(20.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 4 (80.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Intervention characteristics | Adaptability | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (100.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) |
Complexity | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (25.00%) | 1 (25.00%) | 2 (50.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Design quality and packaging | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Evidence strength and quality | 0 (0.00%) | 3 (75.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (25.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Intervention source | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Relative advantage | 0 (0.00%) | 2 (40.00%) | 1 (20.00%) | 2 (40.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Trialability | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (33.33%) | 2 (66.67%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Outer setting | Cosmopolitanism | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (100.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) |
External policy and incentives | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Patient needs and resources | 0 (0.00%) | 2 (66.67%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (33.33%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Peer pressure | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Inner setting | Combined | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (20.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 4 (80.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) |
Culture | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (50.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (50.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Implementation climate | 0 (0.00%) | 3 (23.08%) | 1 (7.69%) | 2 (15.39%) | 1 (7.69%) | 6 (46.15%) | |
IC: tension for change | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
IC: compatibility | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (100.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
IC: relative priority | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (100.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
IC: organizational incentives and rewards | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (33.33%) | 1 (33.33%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (33.33%) | |
IC: goals and feedback | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
IC: learning climate | 0 (0.00%) | 3 (21.43%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 11 (78.57%) | |
Networks and communications | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 10 (100.00%) | |
Readiness for implementation | 1 (8.33%) | 1 (8.33%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (8.33%) | 5 (41.67%) | 4 (34.33%) | |
RI: leadership engagement | 0 (0.00%) | 2 (100.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
RI: available resources | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (100.00%) | |
RI: access to knowledge and information | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (100.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Structural characteristics | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (100.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Characteristics of individuals | Knowledge and beliefs about the intervention | 1 (2.00%) | 38 (76.00%) | 1 (2.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 6 (12.00%) | 4 (8.00%) |
Individual stage of change | 0 (0.00%) | 4 (80.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (20.00%) | |
Individual identification with the organization | 2 (40.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (20.00%) | 1 (20.00%) | 1 (20.00%) | |
Other personal attributes | 0 (0.00%) | 11 (42.31%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 9 (34.62%) | 6 (23.08%) | |
Self-efficacy | 0 (0.00%) | 4 (100.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Process | Engaging | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) |
Engaging: opinion leaders | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Engaging: formally appointed internal implementation leaders | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Engaging: champions | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Engaging: external change agents | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (100.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Executing | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (100.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Planning | 0 (0.00%) | 5 (25.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 5 (25.00%) | 2 (10.00%) | 8 (40.00%) | |
Reflecting and evaluating | 2 (14.29%) | 11 (78.57%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (7.14%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Client outcomes | Satisfaction | 1 (10.00%) | 2 (20.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 4 (40.00%) | 3 (30.00%) |
M # of instruments across constructs | 0.46 | 3.91 | 0.24 | 0.89 | 0.72 | 1.22 |
Domain
| Construct
| DirectorN(%)
| SupervisorN(%)
| ProviderN(%)
| ConsumerN(%)
| OtherN(%)
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Implementation outcomes | Acceptability | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (1.96%) | 31 (60.78%) | 16 (31.37%) | 3 (5.88%) |
Adoption | 4 (16.67%) | 5 (20.83%) | 11 (45.83%) | 2 (8.33%) | 8 (33.33%) | |
Appropriateness | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (14.29%) | 3 (42.86%) | 1 (14.29%) | 2 (28.57%) | |
Feasibility | 1 (7.14%) | 1 (7.14%) | 7 (50.00%) | 6 (42.86%) | 1 (7.14%) | |
Penetration | 0 (0.00%) | 2 (40.00%) | 1 (20.00%) | 1 (20.00%) | 1 (20.00%) | |
Sustainability | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 4 (44.44%) | 2 (22.22%) | 3 (33.33%) | |
Intervention characteristics | Adaptability | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (100%) | 1 (100%) | 0 (0.00%) |
Complexity | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 3 (75.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (25.00%) | |
Design quality and packaging | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Evidence strength and quality | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (20.00%) | 3 (60.00%) | 1 (20.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Intervention source | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Relative advantage | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 4 (57.14%) | 1 (14.29%) | 3 (42.86%) | |
Trialability | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 2 (66.67%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (33.33%) | |
Outer setting | Cosmopolitanism | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (100%) |
External policy and incentives | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Patient needs and resources | 1 (33.33%) | 0 (0.00%) | 2 (66.67%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Peer pressure | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Inner setting | Combined | 1 (11.11%) | 2 (22.22%) | 5 (55.55%) | 1 (11.11%) | 1 (11.11%) |
Culture | 2 (25.00%) | 3 (37.50%) | 5 (62.50%) | 2 (25.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Implementation climate | 1 (6.67%) | 10 (66.67%) | 5 (33.33%) | 4 (26.67%) | 1 (6.67%) | |
IC: tension for change | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
IC: Compatibility | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (100%) | |
IC: Relative priority | 1 (100%) | 1 (100%) | 1 (100%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
IC: Organizational incentives and rewards | 0 (0.00%) | 2 (50.00%) | 1 (25.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (25.00%) | |
IC: goals and feedback | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
IC: learning climate | 0 (0.00%) | 6 (42.86%) | 1 (7.14%) | 7 (50.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Networks and communications | 0(0.00%) | 3 (25.00%) | 4 (33.33%) | 6 (50.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Readiness for implementation | 2 (10.53%) | 0 (0.00%) | 3 (15.79%) | 5 (26.32%) | 10 (52.63%) | |
RI: leadership engagement | 1(25.00%) | 4 (100%) | 2 (50.00%) | 1 (25.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
RI: available resources | 0 (0.00%) | 2 (100%) | 1 (50.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
RI: access to knowledge and information | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (100%) | |
Structural characteristics | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (50.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (50.00%) | |
Characteristics of individuals | Knowledge and beliefs about the intervention | 1 (1.79%) | 2 (3.57%) | 40 (71.43%) | 8 (14.29%) | 7 (12.50%) |
Individual stage of change | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 4 (66.67%) | 1 (16.67%) | 1 (16.67%) | |
Individual identification with the organization | (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 5 (83.33%) | 1 (16.67%) | |
Other personal attributes | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 8 (21.05%) | 18 (47.37%) | 12 (31.58%) | |
Self-efficacy | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 2 (50.00%) | 1 (25.00%) | 1 (25.00%) | |
Process | Engaging | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (100%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) |
Engaging: opinion leaders | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 3 (100%) | |
Engaging: formally appointed internal implementation leaders | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Engaging: champions | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Engaging: external change agents | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (100%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Executing | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (100%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Planning | 0 (0.00%) | 5 (17.86%) | 5 (17.86%) | 5 (17.86%) | 17 (60.71%) | |
Reflecting and evaluating | 0 (0.00%) | 2 (10.00%) | 9 (45.00%) | 1 (5.00%) | 10 (50.00%) | |
Client outcomes | Satisfaction | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 4 (28.57%) | 5 (35.71%) | 6 (42.86%) |
Domain
| Construct
| Health careN(%)
| WorkplaceN(%)
| Mental illness/substance abuseN(%)
| EducationN(%)
| OtherN(%)
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Implementation outcomes | Acceptability | 3 (5.88%) | 0 (0.00%) | 28 (54.90%) | 22 (43.14%) | 0 (0.00%) |
Adoption | 2 (8.33%) | 6 (25.00%) | 5 (20.83%) | 5 (20.83%) | 6 (25.00%) | |
Appropriateness | 1 (14.29%) | 1 (14.29%) | 2 (28.57%) | 1 (14.29%) | 2 (28.57%) | |
Feasibility | 5 (35.71%) | 0 (0.00%) | 8 (57.14%) | 3 (21.43%) | 3 (21.43%) | |
Penetration | 1 (20.00%) | 1 (20.00%) | 3 (60.00%) | 2 (40.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Sustainability | 1 (11.11%) | 3 (33.33%) | 4 (44.44%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (11.11%) | |
Intervention characteristics | Adaptability | 1 (100%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (100%) | 0 (0.00%) |
Complexity | 1 (25.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (25.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 2 (50.00%) | |
Design quality and packaging | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Evidence strength and quality | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 4 (100%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Intervention source | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Relative advantage | 1 (14.29%) | 0 (0.00%) | 2 (28.57%) | 0 (0.00%) | 4 (57.14%) | |
Trialability | 1 (33.33%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0(0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 2 (66.67%) | |
Outer setting | Cosmopolitanism | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (100%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) |
External policy and incentives | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Patient needs and resources | 1 (33.33%) | 0 (0.00%) | 2 (66.67%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Peer pressure | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Inner setting | Combined | 6 (66.67%) | 1 (11.11%) | 1 (11.11%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (11.11%) |
Culture | 1 (12.50%) | 5 (62.50%) | 1 (12.50%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (12.50%) | |
Implementation climate | 4 (26.67%) | 7 (46.67%) | 2 (13.33%) | 1 (6.67%) | 3 (20.00%) | |
IC: tension for change | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
IC: compatibility | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (100%) | |
IC: relative priority | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (100%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
IC: organizational incentives and rewards | 0 (0.00%) | 2 (50.00%) | 1 (25.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (25.00%) | |
IC: goals and feedback | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
C: learning climate | 0 (0.00%) | 13 (92.86%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (7.14%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Networks and communications | 1 (6.25%) | 10 (62.50%) | 4 (25.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (6.25%) | |
Readiness for implementation | 5 (26.32%) | 1 (5.26%) | 3 (15.79%) | 1 (5.26%) | 9 (47.37%) | |
RI: leadership engagement | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (25.00%) | 3 (75.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
RI: available resources | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (50.00%) | 1 (50.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
RI: access to knowledge and information | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (100%) | |
Structural characteristics | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (50.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (50.00%) | |
Characteristics of individuals | Knowledge and beliefs about the intervention | 3 (5.36%) | 4 (7.14%) | 37 (66.07%) | 6 (10.71%) | 8 (14.29%) |
Individual stage of change | 1 (16.67%) | 1 (16.67%) | 3 (50.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (16.67%) | |
Individual identification with the organization | 0 (0.00%) | 5 (83.33%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (16.67%) | |
Other personal attributes | 2 (5.26%) | 17 (44.74%) | 7 (18.42%) | 0 (0.00%) | 12 (31.58%) | |
Self-efficacy | 1 (20.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 2 (40.00%) | 1 (20.00%) | 1 (20.00%) | |
Process | Engaging | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (100%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) |
Engaging: opinion leaders | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 3 (100%) | |
Engaging: formally appointed internal implementation leaders | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Engaging: champions | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Engaging: external change agents | 1 (100%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Executing | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (100%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | |
Planning | 2 (7.14%) | 5 (17.86%) | 5 (17.86%) | 0 (0.00%) | 17 (60.71%) | |
Reflecting and evaluating | 1 (5.00%) | 1 (5.00%) | 8 (40.00%) | 1 (5.00%) | 9 (45.00%) | |
Client outcomes | Satisfaction | 2 (14.29%) | 1 (7.14%) | 4 (28.57%) | 1 (7.14%) | 6 (42.86%) |