↓ Skip to main content

A refined compilation of implementation strategies: results from the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) project

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#25 of 1,714)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
108 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
1684 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1556 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A refined compilation of implementation strategies: results from the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) project
Published in
Implementation Science, February 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13012-015-0209-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Byron J Powell, Thomas J Waltz, Matthew J Chinman, Laura J Damschroder, Jeffrey L Smith, Monica M Matthieu, Enola K Proctor, JoAnn E Kirchner

Abstract

Identifying, developing, and testing implementation strategies are important goals of implementation science. However, these efforts have been complicated by the use of inconsistent language and inadequate descriptions of implementation strategies in the literature. The Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) study aimed to refine a published compilation of implementation strategy terms and definitions by systematically gathering input from a wide range of stakeholders with expertise in implementation science and clinical practice. Purposive sampling was used to recruit a panel of experts in implementation and clinical practice who engaged in three rounds of a modified Delphi process to generate consensus on implementation strategies and definitions. The first and second rounds involved Web-based surveys soliciting comments on implementation strategy terms and definitions. After each round, iterative refinements were made based upon participant feedback. The third round involved a live polling and consensus process via a Web-based platform and conference call. Participants identified substantial concerns with 31% of the terms and/or definitions and suggested five additional strategies. Seventy-five percent of definitions from the originally published compilation of strategies were retained after voting. Ultimately, the expert panel reached consensus on a final compilation of 73 implementation strategies. This research advances the field by improving the conceptual clarity, relevance, and comprehensiveness of implementation strategies that can be used in isolation or combination in implementation research and practice. Future phases of ERIC will focus on developing conceptually distinct categories of strategies as well as ratings for each strategy's importance and feasibility. Next, the expert panel will recommend multifaceted strategies for hypothetical yet real-world scenarios that vary by sites' endorsement of evidence-based programs and practices and the strength of contextual supports that surround the effort.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 108 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,556 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 <1%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Indonesia 2 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Unknown 1541 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 259 17%
Student > Master 240 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 209 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 125 8%
Other 94 6%
Other 304 20%
Unknown 325 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 304 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 226 15%
Social Sciences 184 12%
Psychology 176 11%
Business, Management and Accounting 34 2%
Other 214 14%
Unknown 418 27%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 91. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 July 2022.
All research outputs
#385,461
of 22,516,255 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#25
of 1,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,301
of 329,057 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,516,255 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,714 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,057 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them