About Us

Mission

This interactive webtool is designed to help researchers and practitioners develop a ‘logic model’ or diagram for their research or practice question, select the dissemination and implementation (D&I) theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs) that best fit(s) their research question or practice problem, combine multiple D&I TMFs, adapt the D&I TMF(s) to the study or practice context, use the D&I TMF(s) throughout the research or practice process, and find existing assessments to measure the key constructs of the D&I TMF(s) selected. We use “TMF” throughout this tool when referring to D&I Theories, Models, and Frameworks.

Team

The Dissemination and Implementation Models in Health Research and Practice webtool was developed and is maintained as a collaborative effort of colleagues from the ACCORDS Dissemination and Implementation Science Program at the University of Colorado, Denver, the Dissemination and Implementation Research Core (DIRC) at the Washington University Institute for Clinical and Translational Science and the Dissemination and Implementation Science Center (DISC) at UC San Diego.

UC San Diego And University of Colorado, Denver

University of Colorado, Denver

Washington University in St. Louis

Method

The initial set of TMFs for this website were selected from two reviews of the D&I literature:

Tabak RG, Khoong EC, Chambers DA, Brownson RC. Bridging Research and Practice: Models for Dissemination and Implementation Research. Am J Prev Med 2012;43(3):337-350.

Mitchell SA, Fisher CA, Hastings CE, Silverman LB, Wallen GR. A Thematic Analysis of Theoretical Models for Translational Science in Nursing: Mapping the Field. Nurs Outlook 2010;58(6):287-300.

Additional TMFs are added based on expert recommendations and more recent reviews of models (e.g., Wilson et al. , Birken et al. , Strifler et al ) as they become available.

Each TMF is categorized using an expanded criteria developed based on the original Tabak and colleagues paper:

  • TMFs: Theories, Models, and/or Frameworks
  • D and/or I: The focus on dissemination and/or implementation activities. D-only focuses on an active approach of spreading evidence-based interventions to target audience via determined channels using planned strategies. D=I, D>I, and I>D means there is some focus on both dissemination and implementation. I-only focuses on process of putting to use or integrating evidence-based interventions within a setting.
  • Construct Flexibility: The definition/flexibility of the model constructs. Construct flexibility is measured on a 1-5 scale, with Broad (1) meaning constructs are loosely outlined and defined allowing for greater flexibility to apply the model to a wide array of D&I activities and contexts, or Operational (5) meaning constructs are detailed with step-by-step actions for completion of D&I research.
  • Socio-Ecological Levels: The level of the framework at which the model operates. Individual includes personal characteristics; Organization includes hospitals, service organizations, and factories; Community includes local government and neighborhoods; System includes hospital systems and government; Policy includes changes in policy.
  • Field of Origin: The field of study in which the model originated.
  • Practitioner/Researcher: Whether the models is for the use of practitioners or researchers.
  • Constructs: List of components of the website based on abstractions of all elements and their classification based on larger common construct categories used in this webtool.
  • Website: Weblink to website associated with the model when applicable.
  • Number of Times Cited: The # of times the original publication for the model was cited as indicated by Google Scholar since 2016.
  • Citations: Reference of the lead publication(s) describing the model.
  • Examples: Reference to publications that used the model.
  • User ratings: Ratings and comments provided by users on the webtool.

See the Glossary for additional definitions used throughout the site.

An abstraction form was developed to abstract information about additional TMFs. Each TMF was categorized by two experts and a consensus was reached. For further TMF abstractions, a lead expert trained a research assistant to abstract TMFs and did additional validations.

Constructs and subconstructs (i.e., elements) were abstracted from each TMF and a modified Delphi approach was used to create meta-constructs. Meta-constructs were then assigned to TMFs based on their elements. Assessments are linked to databases based on constructs. We are currently in the process of finding a good solution to provide validated assessments relating to the TMFs and constructs included in our webtool. We appreciate your patience as the best solution is formulated.

Funding

Funding for the development of the current version of this webtool was provided by:

  • the ACCORDS Dissemination and Implementation Science Program at the University of Colorado, Denver
  • the Colorado Implementation Science Center for Cancer Control (COISC3) (NIH/NCI award P50CA244688 & 3P50CA244688-05S2)
  • the Washington University Institute for Clinical and Translational Science (NIH/NCATS award UL1TR002345)
  • the Prevention Research Center in St. Louis (CDC award U48DP006395)
  • the Washington University Implementation Science Center for Cancer Control (ISC3) (NIH/NCI award P50CA244431)
  • the Washington University Center for Diabetes Translation Research (NIH/NIDDK award P30DK092950)’
  • the Dissemination and Implementation Science Center (DISC) at UC San Diego

We would like to thank Mary Hook for developing the example for the Adapt and Use sections of the webtool based on her study.