Why don't we see more translation of health promotion research to practice? Rethinking the efficacy-to-effectiveness transition.

By Russell E. Glasgow, E. Lichtenstein, A. Marcus. American Journal of Public Health, 2003

1,804 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/75fdd964cdcc9f39b3157204351019c3641ab43f

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

Citations in the corpus

Effectiveness-implementation Hybrid Designs (2012, background): “Recommended conditions for use: The following conditions are recommended to consider a Hybrid Type 2: (1) there should be strong face validity for the clinical and implementation interventions/strategies that would support applicability to the new setting, population, or delivery/implementation meth”
An Introduction to Effectiveness-Implementation Hybrid Designs (2019, background): “Indeed, many others have supported the notion of blurring across efficacy-effectiveness-implementation silos and/or bridging the practice-based/research-based divide (Brownson et al., 2013; Chambers et al., 2013; Chambers and Norton, 2016; Curran et al., 2012a; Glasgow et al., 2003; Green, 2006; Owe”
A Promising Approach for Expanding and Sustaining School-Wide Positive Behavior Support (2006, background): “Glasgow, Lichenstein, and Marcus (2003) suggest that we must “rethink the efficacy-to-effectiveness transition” (p. 1261), and consider the effects of context factors, such as time, resources, training, feedback, and incentives when moving experimentally validated interventions into practice.”
Beginning with the application in mind: Designing and planning health behavior change interventions to enhance dissemination (2005, background): “The classic efficacy research environment is fundamentally different from practice conditions in terms of participant characteristics, resource availability, competing time demands, and level of expertise of those implementing the intervention (4, 12 ,13).”
Implementation Fidelity in Community-Based Interventions (2010, methodology): “Example frameworks include the RE-AIM model (Glasgow et al., 2003), the Department of Veterans Affairs Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI; Bowman, Sobo, Asch, & Gifford, 2008), and the Behavior Change Consortium (BCC) framework for treatment fidelity (Resnick et al.”
What Works in Youth Violence Prevention (2013, background): “While a full discussion of these issues is beyond the scope of this review, it is clear that much community practice is not based on scientific evidence regarding what works to prevent violence and other problem behaviors (Glasgow et al., 2003; Ringwalt et al., 2009; Saul et al., 2008; Woolf, 2008).”
How can we increase translation of research into practice? Types of evidence needed. (2007, background): “(35) argued that the standard drug study model efficacy trial design, although strong on internal validity, is often weak on external validity (and on information concerning contextual factors).”
Transtheoretical-based bullying prevention effectiveness trials in middle schools and high schools (2007, background): “As highlighted by Glasgow et al. (2003), significant results in effectiveness trials indicate that the interventions are likely to be robust enough to generalize to variable conditions in the real world outside a highly controlled research setting.”
External validity: We need to do more (2006, background): “We have not seen the desired progression from efficacy to effectiveness to dissemination research to widespread adoption of evidence-based practices and policies ( 10 ,12).”
Eliciting and Utilizing Willingness to Pay: Evidence from Field Trials in Northern Ghana (2020, neutral): “More broadly, it relates to an active literature in medicine that distinguishes between efficacy or explanatory trials, which determine treatment effects and mechanisms under ideal circumstances, and effectiveness or pragmatic trials, which measure impacts in clinical settings (Glasgow et al. 2003; ”
Who Adopts Improved Fuels and Cookstoves? A Systematic Review (2012, background): “The science of adoption cannot afford to focus only on internal validity of a few adoption factors while ignoring contextual drivers (Glasgow et al. 2003).”
What We Know and Need to Know about Preventing Problem Behavior in Schools (2008, methodology): “The development of each implementation effort is based on what has been demonstrated to be effective and adapted or contextualized to the unique features of the implementation environment ( Glasgow, Lichenstein, & Marcus, 2003 ).”