Table 1

Models and frameworks organised by integration of patient preferences and values

Name	Steps of model or framework		General themes		Knowledge gaps
Patient values incorporated into model
Iowa Model24	1. Question development 2. Searches, appraises and synthesises the literature 3. If literature is lacking, conduct research	4.Develop, enact and appraise a pilot solution 5. If successful, implement across organisation 6. If unsuccessful, restart process	Recommended for use at an organisational level Detailed flowchart guides decision-making process Identified decision points and feedback loops throughout the model Emphasised pilot project before initiating system-wide project Designed for interprofessional collaboration		User must possess a level of knowledge and related skills to assess evidence
Monash Partners Learning Health Systems Framework26	1. Stakeholder-driven 2. Engage the people 3. Identify priorities 4. Research evidence 5. Evidence-based information 6. Evidence synthesis	7. Data-derived evidence 8. Data/information systems 9. Benchmarking 10. Implementation evidence 11. Implementation 12. Healthcare improvement	A systems-level approach for sustainability and scalability that integrates research and data Implementation is data focused		User must possess a level of knowledge and related skills for assessing literature (not specified)
ARCC27	1. Assess the healthcare organisation for readiness for change 2. Identify potential and actual barriers and facilitators 3. Identify EBP champions	4. Implement evidence into practice 5. Evaluate EBP outcomes	Training programme with tools to assess literature and implement Focuses on mentors undergo training Identifies a network of supportive stakeholders Emphasis on organisation readiness	Encompasses patient values, and clinical skill as evidence Control theory and cognitive behaviour theory guide model	Limited direction on how patient values/preferences are integrated into the model
The Clinical Scholar Model25	1. Observation 2. Analysis 3. Synthesis	4. Application/ evaluation 5. Dissemination	Development of point-of-care nurses who become clinical scholars committed to patient care, knowledge development, translation and implementation Includes the use of research, EBP and quality improvement Depends on EBP mentors and pilot programmes		Skill development and tools dependent on utilising workshops to develop EBP mentors
JBI22	1. Global Health 2. Evidence generation 3. Evidence synthesis	4. Evidence (knowledge) transfer 5. Evidence implementation	Utilises different types of evidence (SR, guidelines, expert opinion). Expert opinion includes patients Evidence dissemination important part of the model		User must possess a level of knowledge and related skills to assess evidence
CETEP23	1. Define the clinical practice question 2. Assess the critical appraisal components 3. Plan the implementation	4. Implement the practice change 5. Evaluate the practice change	Authors reviewed literature, models and additional components believed vital in developing, reviewing and revising patient care practices Incorporates evidence factors, patient factors and clinical setting Most robust questions involving patient preference Uses a pilot programme for implementation		Resources available for assessing the literature discussed but determined to be health system specific
Johns Hopkins21	1. Practice question: EBP question is identified 2. Evidence: the team searches, appraises, rates the strength of evidence 3. Translation: feasibility, action plan and change implemented and evaluated		Well-developed tool kit that provides guide for question development, evidence-rating scale and appraisal guide for various forms of evidence		User must possess a level of knowledge and related skills to assess evidence
Patient values discussed, not incorporated into models/frameworks
Stetler Model17	1. Question development includes project context 2. Identify the relevance of evidence sources and quality 3. Summarise evidence 4. Develop a plan 5. Identify/collect data outcomes to evaluate effectiveness of plan		Designed to encourage critical thinking Allows for categorisation of evidence as external (eg, research) or internal (eg, organisation outcome data) Emphasises use by single practitioner but may include groups		Focus single practitioner Patient value/preference not clearly integrated User must possess a level of knowledge and related skills to assess evidence
KTA18	1. Identify problems and begin searching for evidence 2. Adapt knowledge to local context 3. Identify barriers 4. Select, adapt, and implement	5. Monitor implanted knowledge 6. Evaluate outcomes related to knowledge use 7. Sustain appropriate knowledge use	Adapts for use with individuals, teams and healthcare organisations Is grounded in planned action theory Breaks knowledge-to-action process into manageable sections Provides evidence in a way that influences clinical practice, stakeholders and end-users		Patient values/preference not clearly integrated User must possess a level of knowledge and related skills for knowledge creation
EBMgt19	1. Asking; acquiring; appraising; aggregating; applying; and assessing 2. Predictors; barriers; training organisations; and research institutes		Methodological differences between medical and management research Evidence focuses more on qualitative evidence to prove or disprove different models of organisation and management		User must possess a level of knowledge and related skills for assessing literature Lack of specifics on patient value/preference discussed
St Luke’s31	1. Area of interest 2. Collect the best evidence 3. Critically appraise the evidence	4. Integrate the evidence, clinical skill and patient preferences/values 5. Evaluate the practice change	Hospital-level model adapted from Iowa Model Model success focuses on clear directions, aggressive timeline and the short-term commitment required of team members		Provides a general overview of assessing literature without specifics direction or tools
The I3 Model for Advancing Quality Patient Centred Care32	1. Inquiry 2. Improvement 3. Innovation	4. Inquiry encompasses research 5. Improvement includes quality improvement projects 6. Innovation is discovery studies and best evidence projects	Model focuses on options for EBP, quality improvement and research needs Each process includes a step to obtain pre-data or best evidence Incorporates the voice of the customer		Tools provided for quality improvement but not assessing literature User must possess a level of knowledge and related skills for assessing literature
Model for Change to Evidence Based Practice6	1. Identify need to change practice 2. Approximate problem with outcomes 3. Summarise best scientific evidence 4. Develop plan for changing practice	5. Implement and evaluate change (pilot study) 6. Integrate and maintain change in practice 7. Monitor implementation	The model is based on change theory Supports EBP changes derived from a combination of quantitative and qualitative data, clinical skill and contextual evidence Recommends the creation of team of stakeholders Piloted implementation		Patient values/preference not clearly integrated into model
Patient values not discussed
Evidence-Based Public Health28	1. Community assessment 2. Quantify the issue 3. Develop statement of the issue 4. Determine what is known evidence	5. Develop and prioritise programme and policy options 6. Develop an action plan 7. Evaluate the programme or policy	Incorporates a framework with less emphasis on evidence hierarchy and more emphasis on knowledge translation Evidence: Qualitative and quantitative Matches question to research type		Lack of consensus on evidence analysis and hierarchy Public health models different from medical focus is on health outcomes
ACE Star Model29	1. Discovery: Searching for new knowledge 2. Evidence Summary: Synthesise the body of research knowledge 3. Translation: Provide clinicians with a practice document 4. Integration: Changed through formal and informal channels 5. Evaluation: EBP outcomes are evaluated		Promotes discovery of evidence through systematic reviews Promotes transition of evidence through guideline creation Includes use of qualitative evidence Expertise and patient preference are considered another form of evidence		Patient values/preferences not clearly integrated into model (patient satisfaction measured) Simple overview of each step with limited resources discussed
An Evidence Implementation Model for Public Health Systems33	Not a linear model 1. Circle 1 Evidence implementation target 2. Circle 2 Actors involved in implementation	3. Circle 3 Knowledge transfer 4. Circle 4 Barriers and facilitators	Includes setting measurable evidence implementation targets Includes all actors in all stages of knowledge transfer to increase shared aim and reduce barriers Model is broad with diverse implementation		Provides a general overview without specifics Public health models different from medical models No specifics of how to assess literature
San Diego 8A’s EBP Model20	1. Assessing a clinical or practice problem 2. Asking a clinical question in a PICO format 3. Acquiring existing sources of evidence 4. Appraising the levels of evidence	5.Applying the evidence to a practice change 6. Analysing the results of the change 7. Advancing the practice change through dissemination 8. Adopting the practice of sustainability over time	Model was created to make it easier for nurses to complete EBP projects Derived primarily from previously published models Change theory part of the model Utilises mentors to implement		No specifics on patient preference/value incorporation User must possess a level of knowledge and related skills for assessing literature (not specified)
Tyler Collaborative Model for EBP30	Phase one: unfreezing 1. Building relationships 2. Diagnosing the problem 3. Acquiring resources Phase two: moving 1. Choosing the solution 2. Gaining acceptance	Phase three: refreezing 1. Stabilisation	Model focuses on barriers of nurses to implement EBP: Difficulty of practicing nurses to synthesise scientific evidence and lack of adequate administrative commitment to make evidence-based nursing a priority Model utilises EBP experts		No mention of patient preference/value
The Practice Guidelines Development Cycle42	1. Select/frame clinical problem 2. Generate recommendations 3. Ratify recommendations 4. Formulate practice guideline	5. Independent review 6. Negotiate practice policies 7. Adopt guideline policies 8. Scheduled review	Original EBP model developed to create clinical guidelines Framework recommends facilitator to assign tasks and manage advancement Appropriate structure needs to be in place for framework to succeed Cycle tolerates discordance between EBP and clinical guidelines and guidelines and institutional policies but requires documentation		No mention of patient preference/value User must possess a level of knowledge and related skills for assessing literature (not specified)

EBP, evidence-based practice .