SynthesisTranslational behavioral medicine2025
Reported use of implementation science theories, models, and frameworks in 151 implementation trials: secondary analysis of a systematic review targeting nursing practice.
Synthesis in Translational behavioral medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Implementation strategies for embedding patient-reported outcome and experience measures (PROMs/PREMs) in routine care: secondary analysis of an umbrella review.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2026Pooled it
- Defining and measuring implementation climate: a scoping review and concept analysis.Implementation science communications · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
24 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTheories, 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.
methodsA 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.
resultsAmong 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.
conclusionsTMFs 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. REGISTRATION INFORMATION: Review registration: PROSPERO CRD42019130446.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
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.