A systematic review of the use of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.
A systematic review of the use of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s13012-016-0437-z
复制
发表时间：
2016-05-17
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Damschroder L
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kirk MA;Kelley C;Yankey N;Birken SA;Abadie B;Damschroder L
2009年，Damschroder等人开发了实施研究的综合框架（CFIR），该框架提供了一个被认为影响实施的结构的全面列表。这项系统性综述评估了CFIR在实施研究中的使用在多大程度上实现了Damschroder等人在使用广度、应用深度和对实施研究的贡献方面提出的目标。我们在Scopus和Web of Science中检索了引用Damschroder等人的原始CFIR出版物（Implement Sci 4：50，2009）的出版物，并下载了每个独特的结果进行审查。在应用排除标准后，最后的文章是发表在同行评审期刊上的实证研究，这些研究以有意义的方式使用CFIR（即，使用CFIR指导数据收集、测量、编码、分析和/或报告）。采用框架分析方法指导纳入文献的提取和综合。429篇独特文章中有26篇（6%）符合纳入标准。我们发现CFIR的应用范围很广; CFIR应用于各种各样的研究目标、设置和分析单位。纳入研究的方法也存在差异（混合方法（n = 13）;定性（n = 10）;定量（n = 3））。CFIR应用的深度揭示了一些需要改进的领域。少数研究（n = 3）报告了选择所用CFIR结构的理由;大多数研究（n = 14）仅使用CFIR指导数据分析;少数研究了任何结局（n = 11）。最后，很少有人反思CFIR对执行研究的贡献。我们的研究结果表明，CFIR已被用于广泛的研究，虽然更深入地使用CFIR可能有助于推进实施科学。为了利用其潜力，研究人员应该考虑如何最有意义地使用CFIR。应用CFIR的具体建议包括明确证明选择CFIR结构的合理性;在整个研究过程中整合CFIR（在研究设计，数据收集和分析中）;以及在研究实施阶段适当使用CFIR（例如，如果研究是实施后的，则使用CFIR将实施的决定因素与结果联系起来）。本文的在线版本（doi：10.1186/s13012-016-0437-z）包含补充材料，可供授权用户使用。
In 2009, Damschroder et al. developed the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), which provides a comprehensive listing of constructs thought to influence implementation. This systematic review assesses the extent to which the CFIR’s use in implementation research fulfills goals set forth by Damschroder et al. in terms of breadth of use, depth of application, and contribution to implementation research. We searched Scopus and Web of Science for publications that cited the original CFIR publication by Damschroder et al. (Implement Sci 4:50, 2009) and downloaded each unique result for review. After applying exclusion criteria, the final articles were empirical studies published in peer-review journals that used the CFIR in a meaningful way (i.e., used the CFIR to guide data collection, measurement, coding, analysis, and/or reporting). A framework analysis approach was used to guide abstraction and synthesis of the included articles. Twenty-six of 429 unique articles (6 %) met inclusion criteria. We found great breadth in CFIR application; the CFIR was applied across a wide variety of study objectives, settings, and units of analysis. There was also variation in the method of included studies (mixed methods (n = 13); qualitative (n = 10); quantitative (n = 3)). Depth of CFIR application revealed some areas for improvement. Few studies (n = 3) reported justification for selection of CFIR constructs used; the majority of studies (n = 14) used the CFIR to guide data analysis only; and few studies investigated any outcomes (n = 11). Finally, reflections on the contribution of the CFIR to implementation research were scarce. Our results indicate that the CFIR has been used across a wide range of studies, though more in-depth use of the CFIR may help advance implementation science. To harness its potential, researchers should consider how to most meaningfully use the CFIR. Specific recommendations for applying the CFIR include explicitly justifying selection of CFIR constructs; integrating the CFIR throughout the research process (in study design, data collection, and analysis); and appropriately using the CFIR given the phase of implementation of the research (e.g., if the research is post-implementation, using the CFIR to link determinants of implementation to outcomes). The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0437-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.