You are here

Article Text

Article menu

Download PDFPDF

Health services research
Protocol
Updating the critical steps of the quality implementation framework: a protocol for an umbrella review of reviews
  1. Kathrine Hald1,2,
  2. Anne Gulbech Ording1,3,
  3. Martin Jorsal4,
  4. Julie Midtgaard4,
  5. Louise A Ellis5,
  6. Samantha Spanos5,
  7. Lisa Pagano5,
  8. Georgia Fisher5,
  9. Jeffrey Braithwaite5,
  10. Søren Paaske Johnsen1,3
  1. 1 Danish Center for Health Services Research, Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark
  2. 2 Medical Diagnostic Centre, University Research Clinic for Innovative Patient Pathways, Silkeborg Regional Hospital, Silkeborg, Denmark
  3. 3 Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark
  4. 4 Centre for Applied Research in Mental Health Care (CARMEN), Mental Health Center Glostrup, Copenhagen University Hospital – Mental Health Services CPH, Copenhagen, Denmark
  5. 5 Centre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
  1. Correspondence to Dr Kathrine Hald; kathrinehald{at}dcm.aau.dk

Abstract

Introduction Implementation science focuses on improving the dissemination, uptake and adoption of evidence into practice. Over the last decade, implementation science research has proliferated, particularly in healthcare and social science. The key synthesis of implementation frameworks conducted by Meyers and colleagues in 2012, and the resulting Quality Implementation Framework, has yet to be updated to incorporate this research. This protocol proposes an umbrella review of reviews (RORs) to synthesise the literature since 2012 on implementation science in the fields of healthcare and social science and provides recommendations for an updated Quality Implementation Framework.

Methods and analysis This ROR will be conducted and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Four academic databases (PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO and Web of Science) will be used to identify peer-reviewed meta-analyses, systematic reviews and scoping reviews published in the English language since January 2012 and report on the development, application or update of one or more implementation frameworks in healthcare or social science contexts. Multiple reviewers will be involved in the screening of articles and extraction of data, and the quality of reviews will be assessed using the AMSTAR (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews) 2. The outcome of interest is the content of implementation science frameworks reported in the included reviews. The content of these frameworks will be synthesised, aggregated and mapped to the four phases and 14 steps outlined in the original Quality Implementation Framework using both deductive and inductive analysis.

Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval is not required as this ROR protocol and the resulting ROR do not involve primary data collection. The protocol as well as the ROR will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals.

PROSPERO registration number CRD42023475994.

  • Implementation Science
  • Health
  • SOCIAL MEDICINE

Data availability statement

Data are available upon reasonable request.

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2024-087628

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Data availability statement

    Data are available upon reasonable request.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • X @juliemidtgaard, @LouiseAEllis

    • Contributors All authors contributed to the design and structure of the protocol. KH drafted the protocol and AGO, MJ, JM, LAE, SS, LP, GF, JB and SPJ critically revised the manuscript. All authors approved the final version. KH acted as guarantor.

    • Funding The work is supported by the Danish Mental Health Fund.

    • Disclaimer While the Danish Mental Health Fund provided funding, they played no role in the research and the decision to publish.

    • Competing interests KH, AGO, MJ, JM, LAE, SS, LP, GF and SPJ declare no conflict of interest. JB is a member of the Editorial Advisory Board at BMJ Open. This association played no role in the decision to submit the protocol for publication in BMJ Open and presents no conflict of interest.

    • Patient and public involvement Patients and/or the public were not involved in the design, conduct, reporting or dissemination plans of this research.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.