Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40165334›Full record

ArticleImplementation science communications2025

Development and testing of an interactive evaluation tool: the Evaluating QUality and ImPlementation (EQUIP) Tool.

Laura McAlpine, Candace Ramjohn, Erin L Faught, Naomi Popeski, Eileen Keogh, Gabrielle L Zimmermann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

6 authors.

Laura McAlpineDepartment of Medicine, Alberta SPOR SUPPORT Unit, Learning Health System Team, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada. laura.mcalpine@ualberta.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0006-9476-2592
Candace RamjohnDepartment of Medicine, Alberta SPOR SUPPORT Unit, Learning Health System Team, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Erin L FaughtPrivate Research and Evaluation Consultant, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Naomi PopeskiDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Eileen KeoghAllied Health Professions, Health Professions Strategy and Practice, Alberta Health Services, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Gabrielle L ZimmermannDepartment of Medicine, Alberta SPOR SUPPORT Unit, Learning Health System Team, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvaluating implementation outcomes is gaining momentum in health service delivery organizations. Teams are increasingly recognizing the importance of capturing and learning from their implementation efforts, and Implementation Scientists have published extensively on implementation outcomes. However, Quality Improvement approaches and tools are more widely recognized and routinely used in healthcare to improve processes and outcomes. This article describes the development of an interactive online tool designed to help researchers and practitioners effectively design and develop appropriate evaluation plans that support the understanding of successful implementation.

methodsThere were two main development phases. Phase 1, from January to October 2020, involved several design sessions with a small group of professionals leading implementation initiatives within the provincial health delivery system. This resulted in a testable prototype. Phase 2, from November 2020 to June 2021, focused on usability testing and interviews with a broader group of researchers and professionals leading implementation initiatives across the province.

resultsThe result is the EQUIP (Evaluating QUality and ImPlementation) Tool, an interactive online tool that integrates quality measures from the Alberta Quality Matrix for Health and implementation measures from widely used outcomes frameworks, such as the one developed by Proctor and colleagues and the RE-AIM planning and evaluation framework. The tool encourages users to explore implementation outcomes and quality dimensions from different perspectives and select questions and indicators relevant to their project.

conclusionThe EQUIP tool was designed and refined in collaboration with end users to create an accessible and practical online tool. This work addresses the call for greater integration of Quality Improvement and Implementation Science by combining approaches from both fields to strengthen evaluation processes within the health system.

Indexed as

EvaluationImplementation outcomesImplementation ScienceQuality ImprovementUsability testing

Identifiers

PMID40165334
PMCPMC11956277

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.