Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Sep 16;5(1):98.
doi: 10.1186/s43058-024-00633-5.

A research agenda to advance the study of implementation mechanisms

Collaborators, Affiliations

A research agenda to advance the study of implementation mechanisms

Cara C Lewis et al. Implement Sci Commun. .

Abstract

Background: Implementation science scholars have made significant progress identifying factors that enable or obstruct the implementation of evidence-based interventions, and testing strategies that may modify those factors. However, little research sheds light on how or why strategies work, in what contexts, and for whom. Studying implementation mechanisms-the processes responsible for change-is crucial for advancing the field of implementation science and enhancing its value in facilitating equitable policy and practice change. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality funded a conference series to achieve two aims: (1) develop a research agenda on implementation mechanisms, and (2) actively disseminate the research agenda to research, policy, and practice audiences. This article presents the resulting research agenda, including priorities and actions to encourage its execution.

Method: Building on prior concept mapping work, in a semi-structured, 3-day, in-person working meeting, 23 US-based researchers used a modified nominal group process to generate priorities and actions for addressing challenges to studying implementation mechanisms. During each of the three 120-min sessions, small groups responded to the prompt: "What actions need to be taken to move this research forward?" The groups brainstormed actions, which were then shared with the full group and discussed with the support of facilitators trained in structured group processes. Facilitators grouped critical and novel ideas into themes. Attendees voted on six themes they prioritized to discuss in a fourth, 120-min session, during which small groups operationalized prioritized actions. Subsequently, all ideas were collated, combined, and revised for clarity by a subset of the authorship team.

Results: From this multistep process, 150 actions emerged across 10 priority areas, which together constitute the research agenda. Actions included discrete activities, projects, or products, and ways to shift how research is conducted to strengthen the study of implementation mechanisms.

Conclusions: This research agenda elevates actions to guide the selection, design, and evaluation of implementation mechanisms. By delineating recommended actions to address the challenges of studying implementation mechanisms, this research agenda facilitates expanding the field of implementation science, beyond studying what works to how and why strategies work, in what contexts, for whom, and with which interventions.

Keywords: Causality; Design; Determinants; Implementation science; Implementation strategies; Measurement; Mechanisms; Mediators; Methods; Theory.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Drs. Lewis and Weiner receive royalties from Springer Publishing. Dr. Beidas is principal at Implementation Science & Practice, LLC. She receives royalties from Oxford University Press, consulting fees from United Behavioral Health and OptumLabs, and serves on the advisory boards for Optum Behavioral Health, AIM Youth Mental Health Foundation, and the Klingenstein Third Generation Foundation outside of the submitted work. Dr. Aarons is a Co-Editor-in-Chief, Dr. Beidas is an Associate Editor, and Drs. Powell and Weiner are on the Editorial Board of Implementation Science, none of whom will play a role in the editorial process of this manuscript.

Similar articles

References

    1. Shelton RC, Chambers DA, Glasgow RE. An extension of RE-AIM to enhance sustainability: Addressing dynamic context and promoting health equity over time. Front Public Health. 2020;8:1–8. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gustafson P, Abdul Aziz Y, Lambert M, Bartholomew K, Rankin N, Fusheini A, et al. A scoping review of equity-focused implementation theories, models and frameworks in healthcare and their application in addressing ethnicity-related health inequities. Implement Sci. 2023;18:51. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Pullmann MD, Dorsey S, Duong MT, Lyon AR, Muse I, Corbin CM, et al. Expect the unexpected: A qualitative study of the ripple effects of children’s mental health services implementation efforts. Implementation Research and Practice. 2022;3:26334895221120796. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Dadich A, Vaughan P, Boydell K. The unintended negative conse- quences of knowledge translation in healthcare: A systematic scoping review. Health Sociol Rev. 2023;32:75–93. - PubMed
    1. Woodward EN, Singh RS, Ndebele-Ngwenya P, Melgar Castillo A, Dickson KS, Kirchner JE. A more practical guide to incorporating health equity domains in implementation determinant frameworks. Implementation Science Communications. 2021;2:61. - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources