Frameworks+to+classify+interventions

Reference List  1. Best A, Hiatt RA, Norman CD: ** Knowledge integration: conceptualizing communications in cancer control systems. ** // Patient Educ Couns // 2008, ** 71: ** 319-327.  2. Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE, Kirsh SR, Alexander JA, Lowery JC: ** Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. ** // Implement Sci // 2009, ** 4: ** 50.  3. Lavis JN, Lomas J, Hamid M, Sewankambo NK: ** Assessing country-level efforts to link research to action. ** // Bull World Health Organ // 2006, ** 84: ** 620-628.  4. Dy SM, Taylor SL, Carr LH, Foy R, Pronovost PJ, Ovretveit J // et al //.: ** A framework for classifying patient safety practices: results from an expert consensus process. ** // BMJ Qual Saf // 2011, ** 20: ** 618-624.  5. Cane J, O'Connor D, Michie S: ** Validation of the theoretical domains framework for use in behaviour change and implementation research. ** // Implement Sci // 2012, ** 7: ** 37.  6. Michie S, van Stralen MM, West R: ** The behaviour change wheel: A new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions. ** // Implement Sci // 2011, ** 6: ** 42. 7. Dolan P, Hallsworth M, Halpern D, King D, Vlaev I. MINDSPACE; Influencing behaviour through public policy. 2010. Institute for Government, the Cabinet Office.  8. Century J, Cassata A, Rudnick M, Freeman C: ** Measuring enactment of innovations and the factors that affect implementation and sustainability: moving toward common language and shared conceptual understanding. ** // J Behav Health Serv Res // 2012, ** 39: ** 343-361. 9. Dixon D, Johnston M. Health Behaviour Change Competency Framework: Competences to deliver interventions to change lifestyle behaviours that affect health. 1-46. 10-11-2010. NHS Health Scotland.  10. Hendriks AM, Jansen MW, Gubbels JS, De Vries NK, Paulussen T, Kremers SP: ** Proposing a conceptual framework for integrated local public health policy, applied to childhood obesity - the behavior change ball. ** // Implement Sci // 2013, ** 8: ** 46.  11. Stirman SW, Miller CJ, Toder K, Calloway A: ** Development of a framework and coding system for modifications and adaptations of evidence-based interventions. ** // Implement Sci // 2013, ** 8: ** 65.  12. Perdue WC, Mensah GA, Goodman RA, Moulton AD: ** A legal framework for preventing cardiovascular diseases. ** // Am J Prev Med // 2005, ** 29: ** 139-145.  13. Cohen DA, Scribner R: ** An STD/HIV prevention intervention framework. ** // AIDS Patient Care STDS // 2000, ** 14: ** 37-45.  14. Czaja SJ, Schulz R, Lee CC, Belle SH: ** A methodology for describing and decomposing complex psychosocial and behavioral interventions. ** // Psychol Aging // 2003, ** 18: ** 385-395. 15. Goel P, Ross-Degnan D, Berman P, Soumerai S: ** Retail pharmacies in developing countries: a behavior and intervention framework. ** // Soc Sci Med // 1996, ** 42: ** 1155-1161.  Reference List  1. Best A, Hiatt RA, Norman CD: ** Knowledge integration: conceptualizing communications in cancer control systems. ** // Patient Educ Couns // 2008, ** 71: ** 319-327.  2. Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE, Kirsh SR, Alexander JA, Lowery JC: ** Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. ** // Implement Sci // 2009, ** 4: ** 50. <span style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: 27.0pt; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; tab-stops: right .25in left 27.0pt; text-indent: -27.0pt;"> 3. Lavis JN, Lomas J, Hamid M, Sewankambo NK: ** Assessing country-level efforts to link research to action. ** // Bull World Health Organ // 2006, ** 84: ** 620-628. <span style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: 27.0pt; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; tab-stops: right .25in left 27.0pt; text-indent: -27.0pt;"> 4. Dy SM, Taylor SL, Carr LH, Foy R, Pronovost PJ, Ovretveit J // et al //.: ** A framework for classifying patient safety practices: results from an expert consensus process. ** // BMJ Qual Saf // 2011, ** 20: ** 618-624. <span style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: 27.0pt; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; tab-stops: right .25in left 27.0pt; text-indent: -27.0pt;"> 5. Cane J, O'Connor D, Michie S: ** Validation of the theoretical domains framework for use in behaviour change and implementation research. ** // Implement Sci // 2012, ** 7: ** 37. <span style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: 27.0pt; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; tab-stops: right .25in left 27.0pt; text-indent: -27.0pt;"> 6. Michie S, van Stralen MM, West R: ** The behaviour change wheel: A new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions. ** // Implement Sci // 2011, ** 6: ** 42. 7. Dolan P, Hallsworth M, Halpern D, King D, Vlaev I. MINDSPACE; Influencing behaviour through public policy. 2010. Institute for Government, the Cabinet Office. <span style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: 27.0pt; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; tab-stops: right .25in left 27.0pt; text-indent: -27.0pt;"> 8. Century J, Cassata A, Rudnick M, Freeman C: ** Measuring enactment of innovations and the factors that affect implementation and sustainability: moving toward common language and shared conceptual understanding. ** // J Behav Health Serv Res // 2012, ** 39: ** 343-361. 9. Dixon D, Johnston M. <span style="font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Health Behaviour Change Competency Framework: Competences to deliver interventions to change lifestyle behaviours that affect health. 1-46. 10-11-2010. NHS Health Scotland. <span style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: 27.0pt; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; tab-stops: right .25in left 27.0pt; text-indent: -27.0pt;"> 10. Hendriks AM, Jansen MW, Gubbels JS, De Vries NK, Paulussen T, Kremers SP: ** Proposing a conceptual framework for integrated local public health policy, applied to childhood obesity - the behavior change ball. ** // Implement Sci // 2013, ** 8: ** 46. <span style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: 27.0pt; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; tab-stops: right .25in left 27.0pt; text-indent: -27.0pt;"> 11. Stirman SW, Miller CJ, Toder K, Calloway A: ** Development of a framework and coding system for modifications and adaptations of evidence-based interventions. ** // Implement Sci // 2013, ** 8: ** 65. <span style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: 27.0pt; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; tab-stops: right .25in left 27.0pt; text-indent: -27.0pt;"> 12. Perdue WC, Mensah GA, Goodman RA, Moulton AD: ** A legal framework for preventing cardiovascular diseases. ** // Am J Prev Med // 2005, ** 29: ** 139-145. <span style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: 27.0pt; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; tab-stops: right .25in left 27.0pt; text-indent: -27.0pt;"> 13. Cohen DA, Scribner R: ** An STD/HIV prevention intervention framework. ** // AIDS Patient Care STDS // 2000, ** 14: ** 37-45. <span style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt; margin-left: 27.0pt; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; tab-stops: right .25in left 27.0pt; text-indent: -27.0pt;"> 14. Czaja SJ, Schulz R, Lee CC, Belle SH: ** A methodology for describing and decomposing complex psychosocial and behavioral interventions. ** // Psychol Aging // 2003, ** 18: ** 385-395. 15. Goel P, Ross-Degnan D, Berman P, Soumerai S: ** Retail pharmacies in developing countries: a behavior and intervention framework. ** // Soc Sci Med // 1996, ** 42: ** 1155-1161.
 * ** Article ** || ** Country ** || ** Objective ** || ** Description ** || ** Discipline ** || ** Methodology ** || ** Peer reviewed ** || ** Knowledge users ** || ** Piloted or tested ** || ** Theory based ** ||
 * Best 2008[1] || CAN || to nurture common ground upon which to build a platform for translating what we know about cancer into what we do in practice and policy || matrix of domains of inquiry (individual, organizational, and system/ policy) and types of science (basic, clinical, and population) with examples in each cell || oncology || expert panels, literature review, and concept mapping || yes || yes || yes || no ||
 * Damshroder 2009[2] || USA || the Consolidated Framework For Implementation Research (CFIR) offers an overarching typology to promote implementation theory development and verification about what works where and why across multiple contexts. The CFIR will help advance implementation science by providing consistent taxonomy, terminology, and definitions on which a knowledge base of findings across multiple contexts can be built || 5 major domains: intervention characteristics, outer setting, inner setting, characteristics of the individuals involved, and the process of implementation. 8 constructs relate to the intervention (e.g., evidence strength and quality), 4 to outer setting (e.g., patient needs and resources), 12 to inner setting (e.g., culture, leadership engagement), 5 to individual characteristics, and 9 to process (e.g., plan, evaluate, and reflect) || general || literature review; snowballing, synthesis of theories and frameworks || yes || no || no || yes ||
 * Lavis 2006 [3] || CAN || develop a framework for assessing country-level efforts to link research to action. The main purpose of the framework is to inform country level dialogues about the domains to which attention could be directed in order to link research to action. || a framework with 4 elements for assessing country-level efforts to link research to action. 1 general climate. 2 production of research. 3 mix of 4 clusters of activities used to link research to action. 4 approaches to evaluation. || policy, international || not reported || yes || no || no || no ||
 * Dy 2011 [4] || USA || Develop and evaluate a framework for describing and classifying patient safety practices. || 11 dimensions to describe key features: regulatory versus voluntary; setting; feasibility; individual activity versus organizational change; temporal (one-time vs repeated/long-term); pervasive versus targeted; common versus rare events; PSP maturity; degree of controversy/ conflicting evidence; degree of behavioural change required for implementation; and sensitivity to context || patient safety || literature review, consensus with experts || yes || yes || yes || no ||
 * Cane 2012 [5] || UK || to examine the content validity of the Theoretical Domains Framework to confirm optimal domain structure (number of domains), domain content (component constructs in each domain), and domain labels (most appropriate names that best reflected the content of the validated domain structure). || refined version of the Theoretical Domains Framework with 14 domains (e.g.. Knowledge, skills, beliefs and capabilities,) and 84 component constructs (see Table 2) || general || card sorting and cluster analysis || yes || yes || yes || yes ||
 * Michie 2011[6] || UK || review existing frameworks of behavioural interventions and construct a framework of behaviour change interventions || Framework as a wheel: At the centre of the proposed new framework is a ‘behaviour system’ involving 3 conditions: capability, opportunity, and motivation which forms the hub of a ‘behaviour change wheel’ (BCW) around which are positioned 9 intervention functions aimed at addressing deficits in ≥1 of these conditions; around this are 7 categories of policy that could enable those interventions to occur || behaviour change || literature review; development of new framework; || yes || no || yes || yes ||
 * Dolan 2010 [7] || UK || outline 9 robust influences on human behaviour and underpinned by research from social psychology and behavioural economics || 9 ways policy-makers can use to influence behaviour: messenger; incentives; norms; defaults; salience; priming; affect; commitments; ego || policy || not reported || not reported || not reported || not reported || yes ||
 * Century 2012 [8] || USA || a conceptual framework for describing aspects of implementation, a framework for describing the factors that affect implementation, and tools for measuring each || Innovation Implementation Framework: categories of critical components (structural and interactional); and Factor Conceptual Framework: implementation process framework that includes characteristics of the innovation, individual users, and organization; strategies; elements of the environment; and networks || education and social sciences || literature review || yes || no || no || no ||
 * Dixon 2010 [9] || UK || The Health Behaviour Change Competency Framework (HBCC) orders the competences described in the document Generic Health Behaviour Change: A Comprehensive Competency Framework into a hierarchy, to be used to develop training programs for health and other professionals || hierarchical matrix of competency domains (foundation, behaviour changes behaviour change techniques) organized into 3 levels (low, medium, and high intensity). Behaviour change techniques according to motivation, action, and prompted (cued) routes. || behaviour change || literature review, feedback || no || yes || yes || Yes ||
 * Hendriks 2013[10] || NL || to introduce a framework for the development and implementation of integrated public health policies || extension of the behaviour change wheel, focusing on local policy makers as the target population, adding a second function and a third dimension (rolling ball) with core organizational behaviours, and 4 concentric rings || public health || literature review || yes || no || no || yes ||
 * Stirman 2013 [11] || USA || to develop a coding scheme to characterize modifications made to evidence based interventions when they are implemented in contexts or with populations that differ from that in which they were originally developed or tested || classification system with coding in 5 areas: who decided to make the modification; what was modified (content, context [format, setting, personnel, population], and to training and evaluation processes), at what level of delivery, and the nature of the content modification. || general || literature review || yes || no || no || no ||
 * Purdue 2005[12] || USA || a conceptual overview of legal strategies, applicable at the federal, state, and local levels, that can be employed by healthcare providers, public health practitioners, legislators, and other policymakers for addressing the public health burden of cardiovascular disease || 7 legal strategies for preventing cardiovascular disease: direct regulation, economic incentives and disincentives, indirect regulation through private enforcement, government as information provider, government as direct provider of services, government as employer and landlord, and laws directed at other levels of government. || policy || not reported || yes || no || no || no ||
 * Cohen 2000[13] || USA || proposes a new taxonomy of only two major categories of sexually transmitted disease/HIV preventive interventions || matrix of 2 operational dimensions (individual-level or structural level) and 4 functional dimensions (intervention, individual level effects, and population level effects) || public health, HIV prevention || not reported || yes || no || no || no ||
 * Czaja 2003 [14] || USA || an alternative strategy that facilitates decomposition of complex psychosocial and behavioral interventions into their basic observable elements || matrix of functional domain (cognition knowledge, cognition skills, behaviour, affect), target entity (caregiver, care recipient, sociophysical environment), and delivery system characteristics || behavioral interventions (Alzheimer Disease) || mapping interventions onto framework || yes || no || yes || yes ||
 * Goel 1996 [15] || USA || a conceptual framework in which to analyze factors that may affect retail pharmacy behaviors, and suggests strategies which might be used for changing pharmacy behaviors || factors affecting behaviour: pharmacy factors, client factors, physician practice, and regulatory factors; and 4 strategies for behaviour change: information, persuasion, incentives, coercion || social science, retail pharmacies || literature review || yes || no || no || no ||
 * ** Article ** || ** Country ** || ** Year ** || ** Objective ** || ** Description ** || ** Discipline ** || ** Methodology ** || ** Peer reviewed ** || ** Knowledge users ** || ** Piloted or tested ** || ** Theory based ** ||
 * Best 2008[1] || CAN || 2008 || to nurture common ground upon which to build a platform for translating what we know about cancer into what we do in practice and policy || matrix of domains of inquiry (individual, organizational, and system/ policy) and types of science (basic, clinical, and population) with examples in each cell || oncology || expert panels, literature review, and concept mapping || yes || yes || yes || no ||
 * Damshroder 2009[2] || USA || 2009 || the Consolidated Framework For Implementation Research (CFIR) offers an overarching typology to promote implementation theory development and verification about what works where and why across multiple contexts. The CFIR will help advance implementation science by providing consistent taxonomy, terminology, and definitions on which a knowledge base of findings across multiple contexts can be built || 5 major domains: intervention characteristics, outer setting, inner setting, characteristics of the individuals involved, and the process of implementation. 8 constructs relate to the intervention (e.g., evidence strength and quality), 4 to outer setting (e.g., patient needs and resources), 12 to inner setting (e.g., culture, leadership engagement), 5 to individual characteristics, and 9 to process (e.g., plan, evaluate, and reflect) || general || literature review; snowballing, synthesis of theories and frameworks || yes || no || no || yes ||
 * Lavis 2006 [3] || CAN || 2006 || develop a framework for assessing country-level efforts to link research to action. The main purpose of the framework is to inform country level dialogues about the domains to which attention could be directed in order to link research to action. || a framework with 4 elements for assessing country-level efforts to link research to action. 1 general climate. 2 production of research. 3 mix of 4 clusters of activities used to link research to action. 4 approaches to evaluation. || policy, international || not reported || yes || no || no || no ||
 * Dy 2011 [4] || USA || 2011 || Develop and evaluate a framework for describing and classifying patient safety practices. || 11 dimensions to describe key features: regulatory versus voluntary; setting; feasibility; individual activity versus organizational change; temporal (one-time vs repeated/long-term); pervasive versus targeted; common versus rare events; PSP maturity; degree of controversy/ conflicting evidence; degree of behavioural change required for implementation; and sensitivity to context || patient safety || literature review, consensus with experts || yes || yes || yes || no ||
 * Cane 2012 [5] || UK || 2012 || to examine the content validity of the Theoretical Domains Framework to confirm optimal domain structure (number of domains), domain content (component constructs in each domain), and domain labels (most appropriate names that best reflected the content of the validated domain structure). || refined version of the Theoretical Domains Framework with 14 domains (e.g.. Knowledge, skills, beliefs and capabilities,) and 84 component constructs (see Table 2) || general || card sorting and cluster analysis || yes || yes || yes || yes ||
 * Michie 2011[6] || UK || 2011 || review existing frameworks of behavioural interventions and construct a framework of behaviour change interventions || Framework as a wheel: At the centre of the proposed new framework is a ‘behaviour system’ involving 3 conditions: capability, opportunity, and motivation which forms the hub of a ‘behaviour change wheel’ (BCW) around which are positioned 9 intervention functions aimed at addressing deficits in ≥1 of these conditions; around this are 7 categories of policy that could enable those interventions to occur || behaviour change || literature review; development of new framework; || yes || no || yes || yes ||
 * Dolan 2010 [7] || UK || 2010 || outline 9 robust influences on human behaviour and underpinned by research from social psychology and behavioural economics || 9 ways policy-makers can use to influence behaviour: messenger; incentives; norms; defaults; salience; priming; affect; commitments; ego || policy || not reported || not reported || not reported || not reported || yes ||
 * Century 2012 [8] || USA || 2012 || a conceptual framework for describing aspects of implementation, a framework for describing the factors that affect implementation, and tools for measuring each || Innovation Implementation Framework: categories of critical components (structural and interactional); and Factor Conceptual Framework: implementation process framework that includes characteristics of the innovation, individual users, and organization; strategies; elements of the environment; and networks || education and social sciences || literature review || yes || no || no || no ||
 * Dixon 2010 [9] || UK || 2010 || The Health Behaviour Change Competency Framework (HBCC) orders the competences described in the document Generic Health Behaviour Change: A Comprehensive Competency Framework into a hierarchy, to be used to develop training programs for health and other professionals || hierarchical matrix of competency domains (foundation, behaviour changes behaviour change techniques) organized into 3 levels (low, medium, and high intensity). Behaviour change techniques according to motivation, action, and prompted (cued) routes. || behaviour change || literature review, feedback || no || yes || yes || Yes ||
 * Hendriks 2013[10] || NL || 2013 || to introduce a framework for the development and implementation of integrated public health policies || extension of the behaviour change wheel, focusing on local policy makers as the target population, adding a second function and a third dimension (rolling ball) with core organizational behaviours, and 4 concentric rings || public health || literature review || yes || no || no || yes ||
 * Stirman 2013 [11] || USA || 2013 || to develop a coding scheme to characterize modifications made to evidence based interventions when they are implemented in contexts or with populations that differ from that in which they were originally developed or tested || classification system with coding in 5 areas: who decided to make the modification; what was modified (content, context [format, setting, personnel, population], and to training and evaluation processes), at what level of delivery, and the nature of the content modification. || general || literature review || yes || no || no || no ||
 * Purdue 2005[12] || USA || 2005 || a conceptual overview of legal strategies, applicable at the federal, state, and local levels, that can be employed by healthcare providers, public health practitioners, legislators, and other policymakers for addressing the public health burden of cardiovascular disease || 7 legal strategies for preventing cardiovascular disease: direct regulation, economic incentives and disincentives, indirect regulation through private enforcement, government as information provider, government as direct provider of services, government as employer and landlord, and laws directed at other levels of government. || policy || not reported || yes || no || no || no ||
 * Cohen 2000[13] || USA || 2000 || proposes a new taxonomy of only two major categories of sexually transmitted disease/HIV preventive interventions || matrix of 2 operational dimensions (individual-level or structural level) and 4 functional dimensions (intervention, individual level effects, and population level effects) || public health, HIV prevention || not reported || yes || no || no || no ||
 * Czaja 2003 [14] || USA || 2003 || an alternative strategy that facilitates decomposition of complex psychosocial and behavioral interventions into their basic observable elements || matrix of functional domain (cognition knowledge, cognition skills, behaviour, affect), target entity (caregiver, care recipient, sociophysical environment), and delivery system characteristics || behavioral interventions (Alzheimer Disease) || mapping interventions onto framework || yes || no || yes || yes ||
 * Goel 1996 [15] || USA || 1996 || a conceptual framework in which to analyze factors that may affect retail pharmacy behaviors, and suggests strategies which might be used for changing pharmacy behaviors || factors affecting behaviour: pharmacy factors, client factors, physician practice, and regulatory factors; and 4 strategies for behaviour change: information, persuasion, incentives, coercion || social science, retail pharmacies || literature review || yes || no || no || no ||