ArticleResearch square2026
Using the CFIR 2.0 Framework to Assess the Implementation of GARDE: A Population Health Management Tool for Hereditary Cancer Risk.
Article in Research square, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Identifying individuals at increased hereditary cancer risk remains challenging in primary care settings due to limited time with providers, low self-efficacy in family history collection, and evolving referral guidelines. Genetic Cancer Risk Detector (GARDE), a population-level open-source software platform, uses electronic health record (EHR)-based family history data and automated patient outreach tools to identify and engage individuals who meet criteria for genetic testing. To better understand how such tools can be integrated into diverse health systems, this study applied the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to characterize facilitators, barriers, and key processes involved in implementing GARDE at two large academic medical centers. Methods: Between September 2023 and June 2025, a total of 36 biweekly meetings with principal investigators and key stakeholders involved in GARDE implementations were recorded, date-stamped, transcribed, verified, and coded using CFIR 2.0 domains and subdomains. Facilitators, barriers, and implementation processes were categorized by each site (n =2) and meeting date. Coding captured site-specific contextual factors, meeting-level variation, and co-occurring themes across the implementation timeline. A secondary coder reviewed the transcripts to further contextualize themes and ensure accuracy in coding. Results: Principal investigators and stakeholders discussed 22 facilitators and 32 barriers to implementation in 14 of 36 total meetings. Facilitators predominantly reflected individual characteristics, including stakeholder buy-in and leadership support while the barriers most frequently reflected inner setting constraints (e.g., limited IT or staffing resources), implementation climate challenges (e.g., competing institutional priorities), and innovation characteristics (e.g., installation or integration difficulties), which often co-occurred. Implementation processes were similar across the two sites, with each site engaging in teaming, planning, tailoring strategies, and adapting workflows. Key cross-cutting themes included data privacy considerations, patient outreach strategies (e.g., messaging modality and frequency), and differing institutional motivations for implementation. Conclusion: Findings highlight the importance of coordinated planning, stakeholder engagement, and attention to organizational context when implementing GARDE. These insights will support the development of an implementation toolkit and guide future efforts to integrate population-level genomic decision support tools into routine care.
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.