Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38655394›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in health services2024

RE-AIM for rural health innovations: perceptions of (mis) alignment between the RE-AIM framework and evaluation reporting in the Department of Veterans Affairs Enterprise-Wide Initiatives program.

Emily E Chasco, Jennifer Van Tiem, Nicole Johnson, Erin Balkenende, Melissa Steffen, DeShauna Jones, Julia E Friberg, Kenda Steffensmeier, Jane Moeckli, Kanika Arora and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in health services, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

12 authors.

Emily E ChascoInstitute for Clinical and Translational Science, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, United States.
Jennifer Van TiemCenter for Access and Delivery Research and Evaluation, Iowa City VA Healthcare System, Iowa City, IA, United States.
Nicole JohnsonCenter for Access and Delivery Research and Evaluation, Iowa City VA Healthcare System, Iowa City, IA, United States.
Erin BalkenendeCenter for Access and Delivery Research and Evaluation, Iowa City VA Healthcare System, Iowa City, IA, United States.
Melissa SteffenCenter for Access and Delivery Research and Evaluation, Iowa City VA Healthcare System, Iowa City, IA, United States.
DeShauna JonesInstitute for Clinical and Translational Science, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, United States.
Julia E FribergCenter for Access and Delivery Research and Evaluation, Iowa City VA Healthcare System, Iowa City, IA, United States.
Kenda SteffensmeierCenter for Access and Delivery Research and Evaluation, Iowa City VA Healthcare System, Iowa City, IA, United States.
Jane MoeckliCenter for Access and Delivery Research and Evaluation, Iowa City VA Healthcare System, Iowa City, IA, United States.
Kanika AroraDepartment of Health Management and Policy, College of Public Health, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, United States.
Borsika Adrienn RabinHerbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Human Longevity Science, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, United States.
Heather Schacht ReisingerInstitute for Clinical and Translational Science, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Office of Rural Health (ORH) supports national VA program offices' efforts to expand health care to rural Veterans through its Enterprise-Wide Initiatives (EWIs) program. In 2017, ORH selected Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM), an implementation science framework, to structure the EWI evaluation and reporting process. As part of its mandate to improve EWI program evaluation, the Center for the Evaluation of Enterprise-Wide Initiatives conducted a qualitative evaluation to better understand EWI team' perceptions of, and barriers and facilitators to, the EWI evaluation process. Methods: We conducted 43 semi-structured interviews with 48 team members (e.g., evaluators, program office leads, and field-based leads) representing 21 EWIs from April-December 2020. Questions focused on participants' experiences using strategies targeting each RE-AIM dimension. Interviews were inductively analyzed in MAXQDA. We also systematically reviewed 51 FY19-FY20 EWI annual reports to identify trends in misapplications of RE-AIM. Results: Participants had differing levels of experience with RE-AIM. While participants understood ORH's rationale for selecting a common framework to structure evaluations, the perceived misalignment between RE-AIM and EWIs' work emerged as an important theme. Concerns centered around 3 sub-themes: (1) Discussion: The selection of a shared implementation science framework can be beneficial, but also challenging when applied to diverse initiatives or contexts. Our findings suggest that establishing a common understanding, operationalizing framework dimensions for specific programs, and assessing training needs may better equip partners to integrate a shared framework into their evaluations.

Indexed as

evaluationRE-AIM frameworkrural healthrural health workforceVAveterans

Identifiers

PMID38655394
PMCPMC11035780

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.