Cargando…
Evaluating the successful implementation of evidence into practice using the PARiHS framework: theoretical and practical challenges
BACKGROUND: The PARiHS framework (Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services) has proved to be a useful practical and conceptual heuristic for many researchers and practitioners in framing their research or knowledge translation endeavours. However, as a conceptual framework it s...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2008
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2235887/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18179688 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-3-1 |
_version_ | 1782150407671250944 |
---|---|
author | Kitson, Alison L Rycroft-Malone, Jo Harvey, Gill McCormack, Brendan Seers, Kate Titchen, Angie |
author_facet | Kitson, Alison L Rycroft-Malone, Jo Harvey, Gill McCormack, Brendan Seers, Kate Titchen, Angie |
author_sort | Kitson, Alison L |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The PARiHS framework (Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services) has proved to be a useful practical and conceptual heuristic for many researchers and practitioners in framing their research or knowledge translation endeavours. However, as a conceptual framework it still remains untested and therefore its contribution to the overall development and testing of theory in the field of implementation science is largely unquantified. DISCUSSION: This being the case, the paper provides an integrated summary of our conceptual and theoretical thinking so far and introduces a typology (derived from social policy analysis) used to distinguish between the terms conceptual framework, theory and model – important definitional and conceptual issues in trying to refine theoretical and methodological approaches to knowledge translation. Secondly, the paper describes the next phase of our work, in particular concentrating on the conceptual thinking and mapping that has led to the generation of the hypothesis that the PARiHS framework is best utilised as a two-stage process: as a preliminary (diagnostic and evaluative) measure of the elements and sub-elements of evidence (E) and context (C), and then using the aggregated data from these measures to determine the most appropriate facilitation method. The exact nature of the intervention is thus determined by the specific actors in the specific context at a specific time and place. In the process of refining this next phase of our work, we have had to consider the wider issues around the use of theories to inform and shape our research activity; the ongoing challenges of developing robust and sensitive measures; facilitation as an intervention for getting research into practice; and finally to note how the current debates around evidence into practice are adopting wider notions that fit innovations more generally. SUMMARY: The paper concludes by suggesting that the future direction of the work on the PARiHS framework is to develop a two-stage diagnostic and evaluative approach, where the intervention is shaped and moulded by the information gathered about the specific situation and from participating stakeholders. In order to expedite the generation of new evidence and testing of emerging theories, we suggest the formation of an international research implementation science collaborative that can systematically collect and analyse experiences of using and testing the PARiHS framework and similar conceptual and theoretical approaches. We also recommend further refinement of the definitions around conceptual framework, theory, and model, suggesting a wider discussion that embraces multiple epistemological and ontological perspectives. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-2235887 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2008 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-22358872008-02-09 Evaluating the successful implementation of evidence into practice using the PARiHS framework: theoretical and practical challenges Kitson, Alison L Rycroft-Malone, Jo Harvey, Gill McCormack, Brendan Seers, Kate Titchen, Angie Implement Sci Debate BACKGROUND: The PARiHS framework (Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services) has proved to be a useful practical and conceptual heuristic for many researchers and practitioners in framing their research or knowledge translation endeavours. However, as a conceptual framework it still remains untested and therefore its contribution to the overall development and testing of theory in the field of implementation science is largely unquantified. DISCUSSION: This being the case, the paper provides an integrated summary of our conceptual and theoretical thinking so far and introduces a typology (derived from social policy analysis) used to distinguish between the terms conceptual framework, theory and model – important definitional and conceptual issues in trying to refine theoretical and methodological approaches to knowledge translation. Secondly, the paper describes the next phase of our work, in particular concentrating on the conceptual thinking and mapping that has led to the generation of the hypothesis that the PARiHS framework is best utilised as a two-stage process: as a preliminary (diagnostic and evaluative) measure of the elements and sub-elements of evidence (E) and context (C), and then using the aggregated data from these measures to determine the most appropriate facilitation method. The exact nature of the intervention is thus determined by the specific actors in the specific context at a specific time and place. In the process of refining this next phase of our work, we have had to consider the wider issues around the use of theories to inform and shape our research activity; the ongoing challenges of developing robust and sensitive measures; facilitation as an intervention for getting research into practice; and finally to note how the current debates around evidence into practice are adopting wider notions that fit innovations more generally. SUMMARY: The paper concludes by suggesting that the future direction of the work on the PARiHS framework is to develop a two-stage diagnostic and evaluative approach, where the intervention is shaped and moulded by the information gathered about the specific situation and from participating stakeholders. In order to expedite the generation of new evidence and testing of emerging theories, we suggest the formation of an international research implementation science collaborative that can systematically collect and analyse experiences of using and testing the PARiHS framework and similar conceptual and theoretical approaches. We also recommend further refinement of the definitions around conceptual framework, theory, and model, suggesting a wider discussion that embraces multiple epistemological and ontological perspectives. BioMed Central 2008-01-07 /pmc/articles/PMC2235887/ /pubmed/18179688 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-3-1 Text en Copyright © 2008 Kitson et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Debate Kitson, Alison L Rycroft-Malone, Jo Harvey, Gill McCormack, Brendan Seers, Kate Titchen, Angie Evaluating the successful implementation of evidence into practice using the PARiHS framework: theoretical and practical challenges |
title | Evaluating the successful implementation of evidence into practice using the PARiHS framework: theoretical and practical challenges |
title_full | Evaluating the successful implementation of evidence into practice using the PARiHS framework: theoretical and practical challenges |
title_fullStr | Evaluating the successful implementation of evidence into practice using the PARiHS framework: theoretical and practical challenges |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluating the successful implementation of evidence into practice using the PARiHS framework: theoretical and practical challenges |
title_short | Evaluating the successful implementation of evidence into practice using the PARiHS framework: theoretical and practical challenges |
title_sort | evaluating the successful implementation of evidence into practice using the parihs framework: theoretical and practical challenges |
topic | Debate |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2235887/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18179688 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-3-1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kitsonalisonl evaluatingthesuccessfulimplementationofevidenceintopracticeusingtheparihsframeworktheoreticalandpracticalchallenges AT rycroftmalonejo evaluatingthesuccessfulimplementationofevidenceintopracticeusingtheparihsframeworktheoreticalandpracticalchallenges AT harveygill evaluatingthesuccessfulimplementationofevidenceintopracticeusingtheparihsframeworktheoreticalandpracticalchallenges AT mccormackbrendan evaluatingthesuccessfulimplementationofevidenceintopracticeusingtheparihsframeworktheoreticalandpracticalchallenges AT seerskate evaluatingthesuccessfulimplementationofevidenceintopracticeusingtheparihsframeworktheoreticalandpracticalchallenges AT titchenangie evaluatingthesuccessfulimplementationofevidenceintopracticeusingtheparihsframeworktheoreticalandpracticalchallenges |