Evidence mapPaperPMID 32984239Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2020

Comparing, Contrasting, and Integrating Dissemination and Implementation Outcomes Included in the RE-AIM and Implementation Outcomes Frameworks.

Kathryn Louise Reilly, Sarah Kennedy, Gwenndolyn Porter, Paul Estabrooks

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06243068 (Improving Shared Decision-Making and Access to Non-Dialytic Treatment for People With Kidney Disease), which is not on this map. Cited by 50 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT06243068 naenrolling by invitationnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Improving Shared Decision-Making and Access to Non-Dialytic Treatment for People With Kidney Disease (The ExPAND Trial)

TypeinterventionalSponsorGeorge Washington UniversityRan2024 to 2028Enrolled3,000ConditionsChronic Kidney DiseaseArmsEducate and Engage, Educate and Engage Plus Kidney Supportive Care Program
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

50 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Development of the Physical Activity Research Opportunities (PARO) framework.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Kathryn Louise ReillySchool of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.
Sarah KennedyThe Priority Research Centre for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Education, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.
Gwenndolyn PorterUniversity of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, United States.
Paul EstabrooksUniversity of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, United States.

Funding

Tracking and Evaluation CoreU54GM115458 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA MEDICAL CENTER · PI RIZZO, MATTHEW · 2016 to 2025
$42.8M
NIGMS NIH HHS U54 GM115458
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As the field of dissemination and implementation science matures, there are a myriad of outcomes, identified in numerous frameworks, that can be considered across individual, organizational, and population levels. This can lead to difficulty in summarizing literature, comparing across studies, and advancing translational science. This manuscript sought to (1) compare, contrast, and integrate the outcomes included in the RE-AIM and Implementation Outcomes Frameworks (IOF) and (2) expand RE-AIM indicators to include relevant IOF dissemination and implementation outcomes. Cross tabular comparisons were made between the constitutive definitions of each construct, across frameworks, to reconcile apparent discrepancies between approaches and to distinguish between implementation outcomes and implementation antecedents. A great deal of consistency was identified across approaches, including adoption (the intention, initial decision, or action to employ an evidence-based intervention), fidelity/implementation (the degree to which an intervention was delivered as intended), organizational maintenance/sustainability (extent to which a newly implemented treatment is maintained or institutionalized), and cost. The IOF construct of penetration was defined as a higher-order construct that may encompass the reach, adoption, and organizational maintenance outcomes within RE-AIM. Within the IOF approach acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility did not match constitutive definitions of dissemination or implementation but rather reflected theoretical antecedents of implementation outcomes. Integration of the IOF approach across RE-AIM indicators was successfully achieved by expanding the operational definitions of RE-AIM to include antecedents to reach, adoption, implementation, and organizational maintenance. Additional combined metrics were also introduced including penetration, individual level utility, service provider utility, organizational utility, and systemic utility. The expanded RE-AIM indicators move beyond the current approaches described within both the RE-AIM framework and IOF and provides additional planning and evaluation targets that can contribute to the scientific field and increase the translation of evidence into practice.

Indexed as

Implementation ScienceTranslational Research, BiomedicalResearch Designimplementation outcomesImplementation Outcomes FrameworkRE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance)scale-uptranslational reseach

Identifiers

PMID32984239
PMCPMC7492593

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.