Conceptual Framework For The Comparative Analysis of Policy Change
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.
D>I 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.
- Individual
- Organization
- Community
- System
- Policy
Number of Times Cited:
The # of times the original publication for the model was cited as indicated by Google Scholar since 2016.
52 Field of Origin:
The field of study in which the model originated.
Policy Practitioner/Researcher:
Whether the model is for the use of practitioners and/or researchers.
Researcher and Practitioner Rating:
These are ratings given by users of the site.
Constructs:
Name of the construct developed by classifying/aligning the elements abstracted from models.
Assessment Instruments:
Name of the assessment developed by classifying/aligning the elements abstracted from models.
- AHRQ Digital Health Equity Framework
- Clinical Sustainability Assessment Tool (CSAT)
- Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) Interview Guide (Lam)
- Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) Interview Guide (Zhao)
- Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) Interview Guide Webtool
- Context Matters Reporting Template
- Diagnosis Related Group (DRG) Policy Survey
- Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications to Evidence-based Implementation Strategies (FRAME-IS) Adaptation Tracking Instrument
- Implementation Climate Scale (ICS)
- Implementation Leadership Scale (ILS)
- Implementation Strategy Usability Scale
- Intervention Scalability Assessment Tool (ISAT)
- Iterative, Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (iPRISM) Webtool
- Local Wellness Policy Implementation Checklist
- Normalization Process Theory Interview Guide
- Normalization Process Theory Questionnaire (NoMAD)
- Partnership/Synergy Assessment Tool
- Policy Coalition Evaluation Tool (PCET)
- Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM) Contextual Survey Instrument (PCSI)
- Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM) Interview Guide
- Program Sustainability Assessment Tool (PSAT)
- Rapid Assessment Procedure Informed Clinical Ethnography (RAPICE) Protocol, Activity, and Interview Prompt Guide
- Rapid Assessment Procedure Informed Clinical Ethnography (RAPICE) Summary Template
- Readiness Thinking Tool - Observation Guide
- Readiness Thinking Tool - Survey
- Readiness for Recovery and Resiliency - Interview Guide
- Rehabilitation Policy Questionnaire
- Research Engagement Survey Tool (REST)
- Research Engagement Survey Tool (REST) - 9 item
- Rutten’s Health Policy Questionnaire
- Short Program Sustainability Assessment Tool (PSAT)
- Stages of Implementation Completion (SIC)
- integrated-Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) Interview Guide
Citations:
The original publication(s) of the model.
Bauer MW, Knill C. A conceptual framework for the comparative analysis of policy change: Measurement, explanation and strategies of policy dismantling. J Comp Policy Anal. 2014;16(1):28-44. Examples:
Citations of studies that have used the model as an outline for their study.
Bondarouk, E., and Mastenbroek, E. ( 2018) Reconsidering EU Compliance: Implementation performance in the field of environmental policy. Env. Pol. Gov., 28: 15- 27. doi: 10.1002/eet.1761.Schaffrin, A. , Sewerin, S. and Seubert, S. (2015), Toward a Comparative Measure of Climate Policy Output. Policy Stud J, 43: 257-282. doi:10.1111/psj.12095
There are no reviews yet. Be the first one to write one.