它们相同吗?区分实施科学研究和扩大人口规模的概念。

IF 2.5 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Karen Lee, Heather McKay, Melanie Crane, Andrew Milat, Luke Wolfenden, Nicole M Rankin, Rachel M Sutherland, Adrian Bauman
{"title":"它们相同吗?区分实施科学研究和扩大人口规模的概念。","authors":"Karen Lee, Heather McKay, Melanie Crane, Andrew Milat, Luke Wolfenden, Nicole M Rankin, Rachel M Sutherland, Adrian Bauman","doi":"10.17061/phrp34232409","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A new discipline, implementation science, has emerged in recent years. This has resulted in confusion between what 'implementation science' is and how it differs from real-world scale-up of health interventions. While there is considerable overlap, in this perspective, we seek to highlight some of the differences between these two concepts in relation to their origin, drivers, research methods and implications for population impact and practice. We recognise that implementation science generates new information on optimal methods and strategies to facilitate the uptake of evidence-based practices. This new knowledge can be used as part of any scaling-up endeavour. However, real-world scale-up is influenced to a much greater extent by political and strategic needs and key actors and generally requires the support of governments or large agencies that can fund population-level scale-up. Furthermore, scale-up often occurs in the absence of any evidence of effectiveness. Therefore, while implementation science and scale-up both ultimately aim to facilitate the uptake of interventions to improve population health, their immediate intentions differ, and these distinctions are worth highlighting for policymakers and researchers.</p>","PeriodicalId":45898,"journal":{"name":"Public Health Research & Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Are they the same? Disentangling the concepts of implementation science research and population scale-up.\",\"authors\":\"Karen Lee, Heather McKay, Melanie Crane, Andrew Milat, Luke Wolfenden, Nicole M Rankin, Rachel M Sutherland, Adrian Bauman\",\"doi\":\"10.17061/phrp34232409\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>A new discipline, implementation science, has emerged in recent years. This has resulted in confusion between what 'implementation science' is and how it differs from real-world scale-up of health interventions. While there is considerable overlap, in this perspective, we seek to highlight some of the differences between these two concepts in relation to their origin, drivers, research methods and implications for population impact and practice. We recognise that implementation science generates new information on optimal methods and strategies to facilitate the uptake of evidence-based practices. This new knowledge can be used as part of any scaling-up endeavour. However, real-world scale-up is influenced to a much greater extent by political and strategic needs and key actors and generally requires the support of governments or large agencies that can fund population-level scale-up. Furthermore, scale-up often occurs in the absence of any evidence of effectiveness. Therefore, while implementation science and scale-up both ultimately aim to facilitate the uptake of interventions to improve population health, their immediate intentions differ, and these distinctions are worth highlighting for policymakers and researchers.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45898,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Public Health Research & Practice\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Public Health Research & Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17061/phrp34232409\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Health Research & Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17061/phrp34232409","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

近年来出现了一门新学科--实施科学。这导致人们对什么是 "实施科学 "以及它与现实世界中扩大健康干预措施的区别产生了混淆。虽然这两个概念有相当多的重叠之处,但在本视角中,我们试图强调它们在起源、驱动因素、研究方法以及对人群影响和实践的意义等方面的一些区别。我们认识到,实施科学为促进循证实践的采用提供了最佳方法和策略方面的新信息。这些新知识可作为任何推广工作的一部分。然而,现实世界中的推广工作在更大程度上受到政治和战略需求以及主要参与者的影响,通常需要政府或大型机构的支持,以资助人口层面的推广工作。此外,推广往往是在没有任何有效性证据的情况下进行的。因此,虽然实施科学和扩大规模的最终目的都是促进干预措施的采用,以改善人口健康,但它们的直接意图不同,这些区别值得决策者和研究人员强调。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Are they the same? Disentangling the concepts of implementation science research and population scale-up.

A new discipline, implementation science, has emerged in recent years. This has resulted in confusion between what 'implementation science' is and how it differs from real-world scale-up of health interventions. While there is considerable overlap, in this perspective, we seek to highlight some of the differences between these two concepts in relation to their origin, drivers, research methods and implications for population impact and practice. We recognise that implementation science generates new information on optimal methods and strategies to facilitate the uptake of evidence-based practices. This new knowledge can be used as part of any scaling-up endeavour. However, real-world scale-up is influenced to a much greater extent by political and strategic needs and key actors and generally requires the support of governments or large agencies that can fund population-level scale-up. Furthermore, scale-up often occurs in the absence of any evidence of effectiveness. Therefore, while implementation science and scale-up both ultimately aim to facilitate the uptake of interventions to improve population health, their immediate intentions differ, and these distinctions are worth highlighting for policymakers and researchers.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Public Health Research & Practice
Public Health Research & Practice PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
51
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: Public Health Research & Practice is an open-access, quarterly, online journal with a strong focus on the connection between research, policy and practice. It publishes innovative, high-quality papers that inform public health policy and practice, paying particular attention to innovations, data and perspectives from policy and practice. The journal is published by the Sax Institute, a national leader in promoting the use of research evidence in health policy. Formerly known as The NSW Public Health Bulletin, the journal has a long history. It was published by the NSW Ministry of Health for nearly a quarter of a century. Responsibility for its publication transferred to the Sax Institute in 2014, and the journal receives guidance from an expert editorial board.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信