Making sense of implementation theories, models and frameworks

By P. Nilsen. Implementation Science, 2015

3,732 citations recorded by the source corpus.

BackgroundImplementation science has progressed towards increased use of theoretical approaches to provide better understanding and explanation of how and why implementation succeeds or fails. The aim of this article is to propose a taxonomy that distinguishes between different categories of theories, models and frameworks in implementation science, to facilitate appropriate selection and application of relevant approaches in implementation research and practice and to foster cross-disciplinary dialogue among implementation researchers.DiscussionTheoretical approaches used in implementation science have three overarching aims: describing and/or guiding the process of translating research into practice (process models); understanding and/or explaining what influences implementation outcomes (determinant frameworks, classic theories, implementation theories); and evaluating implementation (evaluation frameworks).SummaryThis article proposes five categories of theoretical approaches to achieve three overarching aims. These categories are not always recognized as separate types of approaches in the literature. While there is overlap between some of the theories, models and frameworks, awareness of the differences is important to facilitate the selection of relevant approaches. Most determinant frameworks provide limited “how-to” support for carrying out implementation endeavours since the determinants usually are too generic to provide sufficient detail for guiding an implementation process. And while the relevance of addressing barriers and enablers to translating research into practice is mentioned in many process models, these models do not identify or systematically structure specific determinants associated with implementation success. Furthermore, process models recognize a temporal sequence of implementation endeavours, whereas determinant frameworks do not explicitly take a process perspective of implementation.

Subfields: General Health Professions, Management Science and Operations Research, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/20f099905076f17d25fc7ec3e4571339fea40ad7

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In General Health Professions

In Management Science and Operations Research

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Making sense of complexity in context and implementation: the Context and Implementation of Complex Interventions (CICI) framework (2017, background): “An implementation theory attempts to explain the causal mechanisms of implementation [10]; it is therefore analogous to a programme theory, which attempts”
When complexity science meets implementation science: a theoretical and empirical analysis of systems change (2018, background): “However, broadly, implementation science is characterized by three aims, namely (1) to describe the process of translating research into practice (process models), (2) to understand what influences implementation outcomes (determinant frameworks, classic theories, implementation theories), and (3) t”
An Overview of Research and Evaluation Designs for Dissemination and Implementation (2017, background): “A tacit assumption of this pipeline is that wide-scale use of evidence-based clinical/preventive interventions generally requires a targeted information dissemination and often a concerted, deliberate strategy for implementation to move to this end of the diffusion, dissemination, and implementation”
The updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research based on user feedback (2022, methodology): “Additional constructs were added in the updated CFIR to acknowledge scientific advancement since 2009 that are common across many process frameworks [8] and collective-level change theories [72].”
Clarity out of chaos: Use of theory in implementation research. (2020, neutral): “Nilsen classified published implementation frameworks into three categories (Nilsen, 2015); the white boxes in Fig.”
Empowering teachers to implement a growth mindset (2018, methodology): “The researcher proposes that the short-term sustained change may be due to several variables aligning with implementation science (Nilsen, 2015).”
Artificial Intelligence and the Implementation Challenge (2019, methodology): “We have described use cases (and attendant value propositions) of ML in health care as more likely relating to decision support and less likely to automation, which begins to illustrate the implementation object of focus in ML initiatives [6,7].”
Implementation Mapping: Using Intervention Mapping to Develop Implementation Strategies (2019, background): “Implementation science literature demonstrates a growing body of work on dissemination and implementation models and frameworks in the last several years (8, 9).”
An Introduction to Effectiveness-Implementation Hybrid Designs (2019, methodology): “The use of established implementation frameworks (Nilsen, 2015; Tabak et al., 2012) can aid in designing effectiveness trials for dissemination and implementation.”