State of the Art on Family and Community Health Nursing International Theories, Models and Frameworks: A Scoping Review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Gasperini G
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10530995 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Sep
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
State of the Art on Family and Community Health Nursing International Theories, Models and Frameworks: A Scoping Review.
Gasperini Giulia G Renzi Erika E Longobucco Yari Y Cianciulli Angelo A Rosso Annalisa A Marzuillo Carolina C De Vito Corrado C Villari Paolo P Massimi Azzurra A
Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) 20230918 18
A Family and Community Health Nursing (FCHN) model was first conceptualized by the WHO approximately 25 years ago in response to the epidemiological transition leading to major changes in the population health needs. To date, no study has comprehensively explored the adherence of current applications of FCHN to the WHO original framework. We carried out a scoping review on PubMed, Scopus and CINAHL with the aim to compare the main features of FCHN models developed at the international level with ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundDigital health interventions (DHIs) are a central focus of health care transformation efforts, yet their uptake in practice continues to fall short of their potential. In order to achieve their desired outcomes and impact, DHIs need to reach their target population and need to be used. Many factors can rapidly intersect between this dynamic of users and interventions. The application of theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs) can facilitate the systematic understanding and explanation of the complex interactions between users, practices, technology, and health system factors that underpin research questions. There remains a gap in our understanding of how TMFs have been applied to guide the evaluation of DHIs with real-world health system operations.ObjectiveThis study aims to map TMFs used in studies to guide the evaluation of DHIs. The objectives are to (1) describe the TMFs and the constructs they target, (2) identify how TMFs have been prospectively used (ie, their roles) in primary studies to evaluate DHIs, and (3) to reflect on the relevance and utility of our findings for knowledge users.MethodsThis scoping review was conducted in partnership with knowledge users using an integrated knowledge translation approach. We included papers (eg, reports; empirical quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods studies; conference proceedings; and dissertations) if primary insights resulting from the application of TMFs were presented. Any type of DHI was eligible. Papers published from 2000 and onward were mainly identified from the following databases: MEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL Complete (EBSCOhost), PsycINFO (Ovid), EBM Reviews (Ovid), and Embase (Ovid).ResultsA total of 156 studies published between 2000 and 2022 were included. A total of 68 distinct TMFs were identified across 85 individual studies. In more than half (85/156, 55%) of the included studies, 1 of following 6 prevailing TMFs were reported: Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (n=39); the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance Framework (n=17); the Technology of Acceptance Model (n=16); the Unified Theory on Acceptance and Use of Technology (n=12); the Diffusion of Innovation Theory (n=10); and Normalization Process Theory (n=9). The most common intended roles of the 6 TMFs were to inform data collection (n=86), to inform data analysis (n=69), and to identify key constructs that may serve as barriers and facilitators (n=52).ConclusionsAs TMFs are most often reported to be applied to support data collection and analysis, researchers should consider more clearly synthesizing key insights as practical use cases to both increase the relevance and digestibility of their findings. There is also a need to adapt or develop guidelines for better reporting DHIs and the use of TMFs to guide evaluation. Hence, it would contribute to ensuring ongoing technology transformation efforts are evidence and theory informed rather than anecdotally driven.
| S-EPMC10877497 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundApplication of knowledge translation (KT) theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs) is one method for successfully incorporating evidence into clinical care. However, there are multiple KT TMFs and little guidance on which to select. This study sought to identify and describe available full-spectrum KT TMFs to subsequently guide users.MethodsA scoping review was completed. Articles were identified through searches within electronic databases, previous reviews, grey literature, and consultation with KT experts. Search terms included combinations of KT terms and theory-related terms. Included citations had to describe full-spectrum KT TMFs that had been applied or tested. Titles/abstracts and full-text articles were screened independently by two investigators. Each KT TMF was described by its characteristics including name, context, key components, how it was used, primary target audience, levels of use, and study outcomes. Each KT TMF was also categorized into theoretical approaches as process models, determinant frameworks, classic theories, implementation theories, and evaluation frameworks. Within each category, KT TMFs were compared and contrasted to identify similarities and unique characteristics.ResultsElectronic searches yielded 7160 citations. Additional citations were identified from previous reviews (n = 41) and bibliographies of included full-text articles (n = 6). Thirty-six citations describing 36 full-spectrum were identified. In 24 KT TMFs, the primary target audience was multi-level including patients/public, professionals, organizational, and financial/regulatory. The majority of the KT TMFs were used within public health, followed by research (organizational, translation, health), or in multiple contexts. Twenty-six could be used at the individual, organization, or policy levels, five at the individual/organization levels, three at the individual level only, and two at the organizational/policy level. Categorization of the KT TMFs resulted in 18 process models, eight classic theories, three determinant frameworks, three evaluation frameworks, and four that fit more than one category. There were no KT TMFs that fit the implementation theory category. Within each category, similarities and unique characteristics emerged through comparison.ConclusionsA systematic compilation of existing full-spectrum KT TMFs, categorization into different approaches, and comparison has been provided in a user-friendly way. This list provides options for users to select from when designing KT projects and interventions.Trial registrationA protocol outlining the methodology of this scoping review was developed and registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018088564).
| S-EPMC7023795 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRural healthcare has unique characteristics that affect the dissemination and implementation of evidence-based interventions. Numerous theories, models, and frameworks have been developed to guide implementation of healthcare interventions, though not specific to rural healthcare. The present scoping review sought to identify the theories, models, and frameworks most frequently applied to rural health and propose an approach to rural health research that harnesses selected constructs from these theories, models, and frameworks. This resulting synthesis can serve as a guide to researchers, policy makers, and clinicians seeking to employ commonly used theories, models, and frameworks to rural health.MethodsWe used the Scopus abstract indexing service to identify peer-reviewed literature citing one or more of theories, models, or frameworks used in dissemination and implementation research and including the word "rural" in the Title, Abstract, or Keywords. We screened the remaining titles and abstracts to ensure articles met additional inclusion criteria. We conducted a full review of the resulting 172 articles to ensure they identified one or more discrete theory, model, or framework applied to research or quality improvement projects. We extracted the theories, models, and frameworks and categorized these as process models, determinant frameworks, classic theories, or evaluation frameworks.ResultsWe retained 61 articles of which 28 used RE-AIM, 11 used Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) framework, eight used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), and six used the integrated-Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (iPARIHS). Additional theories, models, and frameworks were cited in three or fewer reports in the literature. The 14 theories, models, and frameworks cited in the literature were categorized as seven process models, four determinant frameworks, one evaluation framework, and one classic theory.ConclusionsThe RE-AIM framework was the most frequently cited framework in the rural health literature, followed by CBPR, CFIR, and iPARIHS. A notable advantage of RE-AIM in rural healthcare settings is the focus on reach as a specified outcome, given the challenges of engaging a geographically diffuse and often isolated population. We present a rationale for combining the strengths of these theories, models, and frameworks to guide a research agenda specific to rural healthcare research.Systematic review registrationhttps://osf.io/fn2cd/.
| S-EPMC11258036 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimThe aim of this study was to synthesize the self-management theory, model and frameworks of patients with chronic heart failure, focusing on construction process, methods and existing problems.BackgroundAlthough the self-management theories have been created and verified for those patients with chronic heart failure, no reviews have been performed to integrate these theories.DesignA scoping review of recent literature (without a date limit) was conducted.MethodsA comprehensive literature search was performed. If the study reported the construction of a self-management theory, model or framework about chronic heart failure cases, it would be included in the review.ResultsFourteen studies were included, which could be categorized into situation-specific theory, middle-range theory and other theory models (including conceptual model, hypothetic regression model and identity description model). It also includes the update and validation of theories, the situation-specific theoretical of caregiver contributions extended from situation-specific theories and the nurse-led situation-specific theory in different contexts.ConclusionSelf-management might contribute to start an education programme before patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) begin their chronic disease live as an individual. Our scoping review indicates that a series of self-management theories, models and frameworks for CHF patients have been developed, but more studies are still needed to validate and support these theories according to their cultural contexts.
| S-EPMC10724582 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Many studies have explored organizational factors that facilitate implementation. However, there is still a limited understanding of determinants external to the implementing organization and their effects on evidence-based intervention (EBI) adoption, implementation, and outcomes. The purpose of this scoping review was to assess definitions of context and identify salient determinants of outer context found in dissemination and implementation theories, models, and frameworks. We employed a compilation of dissemination and implementation frameworks from two reviews as the data source. We abstracted the following information: type of article, outcomes of the framework, presence of a context definition, presence of any outer setting definition and the definition, number and domains of outer setting mentioned, definitions of outer context constructs, and any quantitative measures of outer setting. We identified 19 definitions of outer context. Forty-seven (49%) frameworks reported one or more specific constructs of the outer setting. While the outer context domains described in the frameworks varied, the most common domains were policy (n = 24), community (n = 20), partnerships (n = 13), and communications (n = 12). Based on our review of the frameworks, more conceptualization and measurement development for outer context domains are needed. Few measures were found and definitions of domains varied across frameworks. Expanding outer context construct definitions would advance measure development for important factors external to the organizations related to EBI implementation.
| S-EPMC10182421 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEvaluating knowledge mobilization strategies (KMb) presents challenges for organizations seeking to understand their impact to improve KMb effectiveness. Moreover, the large number of theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs) available can be confusing for users. Therefore, the purpose of this scoping review was to identify and describe the characteristics of TMFs that have been used or proposed in the literature to evaluate KMb strategies.MethodsA scoping review methodology was used. Articles were identified through searches in electronic databases, previous reviews and reference lists of included articles. Titles, abstracts and full texts were screened in duplicate. Data were charted using a piloted data charting form. Data extracted included study characteristics, KMb characteristics, and TMFs used or proposed for KMb evaluation. An adapted version of Nilsen (Implement Sci 10:53, 2015) taxonomy and the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) taxonomy (Powell et al. in Implement Sci 10:21, 2015) guided data synthesis.ResultsOf the 4763 search results, 505 were retrieved, and 88 articles were eligible for review. These consisted of 40 theoretical articles (45.5%), 44 empirical studies (50.0%) and four protocols (4.5%). The majority were published after 2010 (n = 70, 79.5%) and were health related (n = 71, 80.7%). Half of the studied KMb strategies were implemented in only four countries: Canada, Australia, the United States and the United Kingdom (n = 42, 47.7%). One-third used existing TMFs (n = 28, 31.8%). According to the adapted Nilsen taxonomy, process models (n = 34, 38.6%) and evaluation frameworks (n = 28, 31.8%) were the two most frequent types of TMFs used or proposed to evaluate KMb. According to the ERIC taxonomy, activities to "train and educate stakeholders" (n = 46, 52.3%) were the most common, followed by activities to "develop stakeholder interrelationships" (n = 23, 26.1%). Analysis of the TMFs identified revealed relevant factors of interest for the evaluation of KMb strategies, classified into four dimensions: context, process, effects and impacts.ConclusionsThis scoping review provides an overview of the many KMb TMFs used or proposed. The results provide insight into potential dimensions and components to be considered when assessing KMb strategies.
| S-EPMC10777658 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveHealth technology reassessment (HTR) is a field focused on managing a technology throughout its life cycle for optimal use. The process results in one of four possible recommendations: increase use, decrease use, no change or complete withdrawal of the technology. However, implementation of these recommendations has been challenging. This paper explores knowledge translation (KT) theories, models and frameworks (TMFs) and their suitability for implementation of HTR recommendations.DesignCross-sectional survey.ParticipantsPurposeful sampling of international KT and HTR experts was administered between January and March 2019.MethodsSixteen full-spectrum KT TMFs were rated by the experts as 'yes', 'partially yes' or 'no' on six criteria: familiarity, logical consistency/plausibility, degree of specificity, accessibility, ease of use and HTR suitability. Consensus was determined as a rating of ≥70% responding 'yes'. Descriptive statistics and manifest content analysis were conducted on open-ended comments.ResultsEleven HTR and 11 KT experts from Canada, USA, UK, Australia, Germany, Spain, Italy and Sweden participated. Of the 16 KT TMFs, none received ≥70% rating. When ratings of 'yes' and 'partially yes' were combined, the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was considered the most suitable KT TMF by both KT and HTR experts (86%). One additional KT TMF was selected by KT experts: Knowledge to Action framework. HTR experts selected two additional KT TMFs: Co-KT framework and Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle. Experts identified three key characteristics of a KT TMF that may be important to consider: practicality, guidance on implementation and KT TMF adaptability.ConclusionsDespite not reaching an overall ≥70% rating on any of the KT TMFs, experts identified four KT TMFs suitable for HTR. Users may apply these KT TMFs in the implementation of HTR recommendations. In addition, KT TMF characteristics relevant to the field of HTR need to be explored further.
| S-EPMC8220529 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEngaging users of health research, namely knowledge users, as partners in the research process may to lead to evidence that is more relevant to the users. This may optimize the uptake of evidence in healthcare practice, resulting in improved health outcomes or more efficient healthcare systems. However, barriers to involving knowledge users in the research process exist. Theories, models and frameworks may help guide the process of involving knowledge users and address barriers to engaging with knowledge users in research; however, there is little evidence identifying or describing the theories, models and frameworks of health research partnerships.ObjectivesIdentify and describe theories, models and frameworks of health research partnerships. Report on concepts of knowledge user engagement represented in identified theories, models and frameworks.MethodsWe conducted a scoping review. Database (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PCORI) and ancestry and snowball searches were utilized. Included articles were written in English, published between January 2005 and June 2021, specific to health, a research partnership, and referred to a theory, model or framework. No critical appraisal was conducted. We developed a coding framework to extract details related to the publication (e.g. country, year) and theory, model or framework (e.g. intended users, theoretical underpinning, methodology, methods of development, purpose, concepts of knowledge user engagement). One reviewer conducted data extraction. Descriptive statistics and narrative synthesis were utilized to report the results.ResultsWe identified 21 874 articles in screening. Thirty-nine models or frameworks were included in data analysis, but no theory. Two models or frameworks (5%) were underpinned by theory. Literature review was the method (n = 11, 28%) most frequently used to develop a model or framework. Guiding or managing a partnership was the most frequently reported purpose of the model/framework (n = 14, 36%). The most represented concept of knowledge user engagement was principles/values (n = 36, 92%).ConclusionsThe models and frameworks identified could be utilized by researchers and knowledge users to inform aspects of a health research partnership, such as guidance or implementation of a partnership. Future research evaluating the quality and applicability of the models and frameworks is necessary to help partners decide which model or framework to implement.
| S-EPMC9206347 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe uptake, adoption and integration of new medicines and treatment regimens within healthcare delivery can take a decade or more. Increasingly, implementation science (IS) research is being used to bridge this gap between the availability of new therapeutic evidence and its actual application in clinical practice. Little is known, however, about the quality of IS research in this area, including the degree to which theories, models and frameworks (TMFs) are being used. The objective of this study was to conduct a scoping review of the use of TMFs in implementation research involving medicinal products.MethodsA search was conducted for English language abstracts and manuscripts describing the application of TMFs in IS studies for medicinal products. Eligible publications were those published between 1 January 1974 and 12 December 2022. All records were screened at the title and abstract stage; included full-text papers were abstracted using data extraction tables designed for the study. Study quality was appraised using the Implementation Research Development Tool.ResultsThe initial scoping search identified 2697 publications, of which 9 were ultimately eligible for inclusion in the review. Most studies were published after 2020 and varied in their objectives, design and therapeutic area. Most studies had sample sizes of fewer than 50 participants, and all focused on the post-marketing phase of drug development. The TMF most frequently used was the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Although most studies applied all TMF domains, TMF use was limited to instrument development and/or qualitative analysis. Quality appraisals indicated the need for engaging patients and other stakeholders in the implementation research, reporting on the cost of implementation strategies, and evaluating the unintended consequences of implementation efforts.ConclusionsWe found that few IS studies involving medicinal products reported using TMFs. Those that did encompassed a wide variety of therapeutic indications and medicinal products; all were in the post-marketing phase and involved limited application of the TMFs. Researchers should consider conducting IS in earlier phases of drug development and integrating the TMFs throughout the research process. More consistent and in-depth use of TMFs may help advance research in this area.
| S-EPMC10823700 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundImplementation science (IS) frameworks, models and theories (FMTs) have gained popularity in guiding the implementation and evaluation of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) for cancer screening. However, there are significant research gaps in understanding their applications in cancer health disparities contexts. This paper outlines a scoping review protocol designed to explore the utilisation of IS FMTs in cancer screening EBIs to inform intervention designs and adaptations.Methods and analysisThis scoping review protocol adheres to Arksey and O'Malley's five-step methodological framework for conducting scoping studies. Search strategies were conducted in five bibliographic databases: Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and EMBASE. The search was run on 22 June 2023 with an English language filter and a date limit of 2001-current. Two reviewers will independently screen studies for inclusion and exclusion criteria. A third reviewer will be consulted, where appropriate at any of the review stages, to achieve consensus or resolve conflicts. Data will be collected, managed and analysed using Covidence. A narrative synthesis, based on Popay et al's methodology, will guide reporting and summarisation of results. The review will adhere to the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines.Ethics and disseminationThis scoping review is a novel approach for examining a growing corpus of research literature on IS FMT applications used in cancer screening EBIs. As a secondary analysis, this scoping review does not require approval from an institutional review board. We anticipate the review will produce insightful information (eg, challenges, key areas for future directions) on the applications of IS TMFs in designing, deploying and testing EBIs for populations experiencing cancer screening disparities. We will disseminate the results through journals and conferences targeting IS and cancer prevention researchers and practitioners.
| S-EPMC10729160 | biostudies-literature