{"title":"报告在151项实施试验中使用实施科学理论、模型和框架：针对护理实践的系统评价的二次分析。","authors":"Charlene Weight, Rachael Laritz, Simonne E Collins, Meagan Mooney, Billy Vinette, Sonia A Castiglione, Nicola Straiton, Gabrielle Chicoine, Shuang Liang, Justin Presseau, Kristin Konnyu, Marie-Pierre Gagnon, Sonia Semenic, Sandy Middleton, Natalie Taylor, Vasiliki Bessy Bitzas, Catherine Hupé, Nathalie Folch, Brigitte Vachon, Geneviève Rouleau, Andrea Patey, Nicola McCleary, Joshua Porat-Dahlerbruch, Guillaume Fontaine","doi":"10.1093/tbm/ibaf043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs) are central to the development and evaluation of implementation strategies supporting evidence-based practice (EBP). However, evidence on how and to what extent TMFs are used in implementation trials remains limited.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to examine the nature and extent of TMF use in implementation trials, identify which TMFs are most frequently employed, and explore temporal trends in their use.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A secondary analysis was conducted on 151 randomized trials of implementation strategies targeting EBP in nursing. Trials and their protocols were coded in NVivo 14 using a framework adapted from Painter's continuum of theory use (2005) and Michie and Prestwich's theory coding scheme (2010). The framework categorized theory use as \"informed by,\" \"applied,\" \"tested,\" or \"built\" theory. Descriptive statistics were calculated in R, and temporal trends in TMF use across categories were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the 151 trials, 54 (36%) reported using a TMF. Of these, most applied TMFs to guide implementation strategy design (28%), followed by justifying the study's purpose, aims, or objectives (15%). Testing theory was infrequent (9%), and no trials reported refining or building theory. Classic theories, such as the theory of planned behavior and social cognitive theory, were the most frequently cited. No clear temporal trend was found in TMF use across the categories.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>TMFs remain underutilized in implementation trials, with their application primarily limited to justifying study rationale or informing implementation strategy development. Greater emphasis on the testing and refinement of TMFs is recommended to advance implementation science.</p><p><strong>Registration information: </strong>Review registration: PROSPERO CRD42019130446.</p>","PeriodicalId":48679,"journal":{"name":"Translational Behavioral Medicine","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12422783/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reported use of implementation science theories, models, and frameworks in 151 implementation trials: secondary analysis of a systematic review targeting nursing practice.\",\"authors\":\"Charlene Weight, Rachael Laritz, Simonne E Collins, Meagan Mooney, Billy Vinette, Sonia A Castiglione, Nicola Straiton, Gabrielle Chicoine, Shuang Liang, Justin Presseau, Kristin Konnyu, Marie-Pierre Gagnon, Sonia Semenic, Sandy Middleton, Natalie Taylor, Vasiliki Bessy Bitzas, Catherine Hupé, Nathalie Folch, Brigitte Vachon, Geneviève Rouleau, Andrea Patey, Nicola McCleary, Joshua Porat-Dahlerbruch, Guillaume Fontaine\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/tbm/ibaf043\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs) are central to the development and evaluation of implementation strategies supporting evidence-based practice (EBP). However, evidence on how and to what extent TMFs are used in implementation trials remains limited.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to examine the nature and extent of TMF use in implementation trials, identify which TMFs are most frequently employed, and explore temporal trends in their use.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A secondary analysis was conducted on 151 randomized trials of implementation strategies targeting EBP in nursing. Trials and their protocols were coded in NVivo 14 using a framework adapted from Painter's continuum of theory use (2005) and Michie and Prestwich's theory coding scheme (2010). The framework categorized theory use as \\\"informed by,\\\" \\\"applied,\\\" \\\"tested,\\\" or \\\"built\\\" theory. Descriptive statistics were calculated in R, and temporal trends in TMF use across categories were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the 151 trials, 54 (36%) reported using a TMF. Of these, most applied TMFs to guide implementation strategy design (28%), followed by justifying the study's purpose, aims, or objectives (15%). Testing theory was infrequent (9%), and no trials reported refining or building theory. Classic theories, such as the theory of planned behavior and social cognitive theory, were the most frequently cited. No clear temporal trend was found in TMF use across the categories.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>TMFs remain underutilized in implementation trials, with their application primarily limited to justifying study rationale or informing implementation strategy development. Greater emphasis on the testing and refinement of TMFs is recommended to advance implementation science.</p><p><strong>Registration information: </strong>Review registration: PROSPERO CRD42019130446.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48679,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Translational Behavioral Medicine\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12422783/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Translational Behavioral Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/tbm/ibaf043\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Translational Behavioral Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/tbm/ibaf043","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Reported use of implementation science theories, models, and frameworks in 151 implementation trials: secondary analysis of a systematic review targeting nursing practice.
Background: Theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs) are central to the development and evaluation of implementation strategies supporting evidence-based practice (EBP). However, evidence on how and to what extent TMFs are used in implementation trials remains limited.
Purpose: This study aimed to examine the nature and extent of TMF use in implementation trials, identify which TMFs are most frequently employed, and explore temporal trends in their use.
Methods: A secondary analysis was conducted on 151 randomized trials of implementation strategies targeting EBP in nursing. Trials and their protocols were coded in NVivo 14 using a framework adapted from Painter's continuum of theory use (2005) and Michie and Prestwich's theory coding scheme (2010). The framework categorized theory use as "informed by," "applied," "tested," or "built" theory. Descriptive statistics were calculated in R, and temporal trends in TMF use across categories were analyzed.
Results: Among the 151 trials, 54 (36%) reported using a TMF. Of these, most applied TMFs to guide implementation strategy design (28%), followed by justifying the study's purpose, aims, or objectives (15%). Testing theory was infrequent (9%), and no trials reported refining or building theory. Classic theories, such as the theory of planned behavior and social cognitive theory, were the most frequently cited. No clear temporal trend was found in TMF use across the categories.
Conclusions: TMFs remain underutilized in implementation trials, with their application primarily limited to justifying study rationale or informing implementation strategy development. Greater emphasis on the testing and refinement of TMFs is recommended to advance implementation science.
期刊介绍：
Translational Behavioral Medicine publishes content that engages, informs, and catalyzes dialogue about behavioral medicine among the research, practice, and policy communities. TBM began receiving an Impact Factor in 2015 and currently holds an Impact Factor of 2.989.
TBM is one of two journals published by the Society of Behavioral Medicine. The Society of Behavioral Medicine is a multidisciplinary organization of clinicians, educators, and scientists dedicated to promoting the study of the interactions of behavior with biology and the environment, and then applying that knowledge to improve the health and well-being of individuals, families, communities, and populations.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
