A tool to evaluate the integration of implementation science methods in a research project: The Dissemination and Implementation Research Capability Self Survey (DIRC-SS).

IF 2.7 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Journal of Clinical and Translational Science Pub Date : 2026-02-13 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.1017/cts.2026.10711
Heather J Gotham, Briana M Patrick, Praise F Olatunde, Jane P Kim, Helene Chokron Garneau, Sara J Becker, C Hendricks Brown, William C Becker, Mark P McGovern
{"title":"A tool to evaluate the integration of implementation science methods in a research project: The Dissemination and Implementation Research Capability Self Survey (DIRC-SS).","authors":"Heather J Gotham, Briana M Patrick, Praise F Olatunde, Jane P Kim, Helene Chokron Garneau, Sara J Becker, C Hendricks Brown, William C Becker, Mark P McGovern","doi":"10.1017/cts.2026.10711","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSAs) are positioned to enhance the integration of rigorous implementation research methods into projects across their networks, but lack a systematic, standardized process to do so. This study introduces the Dissemination and Implementation Research Capability Self Survey (DIRC-SS), a pragmatic instrument to evaluate and integrate implementation science methods in traditional research activities.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We developed the 15-item DIRC-SS to assess researchers' use of implementation research methods across five key constructs. Its reliability (inter-rater agreement and internal consistency) and sensitivity (change over time) were examined in 10 NIH-funded research projects via ratings assigned by the research teams and by implementation science experts at baseline and one year later.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The DIRC-SS total score demonstrated good internal consistency and inter-rater reliability increased over one year. Although the research team ratings did not change significantly over time, the expert ratings significantly increased, and effect sizes across research teams and expert raters were large in this small sample study.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The DIRC-SS demonstrated good internal consistency reliability and moderate inter-rater reliability. It effectively distinguished between different levels of implementation research methods integration. Unlike tools focused on grant proposals or final reports, the DIRC-SS can be used at any point in the research process by a research team as a self-survey, by implementation science experts in a consultation process, or across a CTSA program to characterize the implementation science methods employed across projects and highlight targeted areas for researcher education and training.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"10 1","pages":"e55"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13040393/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2026.10711","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSAs) are positioned to enhance the integration of rigorous implementation research methods into projects across their networks, but lack a systematic, standardized process to do so. This study introduces the Dissemination and Implementation Research Capability Self Survey (DIRC-SS), a pragmatic instrument to evaluate and integrate implementation science methods in traditional research activities.

Methods: We developed the 15-item DIRC-SS to assess researchers' use of implementation research methods across five key constructs. Its reliability (inter-rater agreement and internal consistency) and sensitivity (change over time) were examined in 10 NIH-funded research projects via ratings assigned by the research teams and by implementation science experts at baseline and one year later.

Results: The DIRC-SS total score demonstrated good internal consistency and inter-rater reliability increased over one year. Although the research team ratings did not change significantly over time, the expert ratings significantly increased, and effect sizes across research teams and expert raters were large in this small sample study.

Conclusions: The DIRC-SS demonstrated good internal consistency reliability and moderate inter-rater reliability. It effectively distinguished between different levels of implementation research methods integration. Unlike tools focused on grant proposals or final reports, the DIRC-SS can be used at any point in the research process by a research team as a self-survey, by implementation science experts in a consultation process, or across a CTSA program to characterize the implementation science methods employed across projects and highlight targeted areas for researcher education and training.

一种评估研究项目中实施科学方法整合的工具:传播与实施研究能力自我调查(DIRC-SS)。
简介:临床和转化科学奖(CTSAs)旨在加强将严格的实施研究方法整合到其网络中的项目中,但缺乏系统的标准化流程。本研究引入了传播与实施研究能力自我调查(DIRC-SS),这是一种评估和整合传统研究活动中实施科学方法的实用工具。方法:我们开发了15项DIRC-SS来评估研究者在五个关键构念上使用实施研究方法。在美国国立卫生研究院资助的10个研究项目中,通过研究团队和实施科学专家在基线和一年后分配的评级,对其可靠性(评分者之间的一致性和内部一致性)和敏感性(随时间的变化)进行了检验。结果:DIRC-SS总分具有良好的内部一致性,评分者间的信度在一年内有所提高。虽然研究团队的评分没有随着时间的推移而显著改变,但专家评分显著增加,并且在这个小样本研究中,研究团队和专家评分者的效应量很大。结论:DIRC-SS具有良好的内部一致性信度和中等的量表间信度。有效区分了不同层次的实施研究方法整合。与专注于拨款提案或最终报告的工具不同,DIRC-SS可以在研究过程中的任何时候被研究团队用作自我调查,由实施科学专家在咨询过程中使用,或跨CTSA计划使用,以表征跨项目采用的实施科学方法,并突出研究人员教育和培训的目标领域。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical and Translational Science
Journal of Clinical and Translational Science MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
26.90%
发文量
437
审稿时长
18 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书