AIMD

A validated, simplified framework of interventions to promote and integrate evidence into health practices, systems, and policies

Peter Bragge, Jeremy M. Grimshaw, Cynthia Lokker, Heather Colquhoun, Lauren Albrecht, Justine Baron, Ann Dadich, Laura Damschroder, Kristin Danko, Maria E. Fernandez, Signe Agnes Flottorp, Heather L. Gainforth, Kate Gooding, Ian D. Graham, Susanne Hempel, Simon Kitto, Jennifer Leeman, Danielle Mazza, Ann McKibbon, Susan Michie & 7 others Teryl Nuckols, John Ovretveit, Gjalt Jorn Y Peters, Hugo Sax, Shannon D. Scott, Kathleen R. Stevens, Michael G. Wilson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Background: Proliferation of terms describing the science of effectively promoting and supporting the use of research evidence in healthcare policy and practice has hampered understanding and development of the field. To address this, an international Terminology Working Group developed and published a simplified framework of interventions to promote and integrate evidence into health practices, systems, and policies. This paper presents results of validation work and a second international workgroup meeting, culminating in the updated AIMD framework [Aims, Ingredients, Mechanism, Delivery]. Methods: Framework validity was evaluated against terminology schemas (n = 51); primary studies (n = 37); and reporting guidelines (n = 10). Framework components were independently categorized as fully represented, partly represented, or absent by two researchers. Opportunities to refine the framework were systematically recorded. A meeting of the expanded international Terminology Working Group updated the framework by reviewing and deliberating upon validation findings and refinement proposals. Results: There was variation in representativeness of the components across the three types of literature, in particular for the component 'causal mechanisms'. Analysis of primary studies revealed that representativeness of this concept lowered from 92 to 68% if only explicit, rather than explicit and non-explicit references to causal mechanisms were included. All components were very well represented in reporting guidelines, however the level of description of these was lower than in other types of literature. Twelve opportunities were identified to improve the framework, 9 of which were operationalized at the meeting. The updated AIMD framework comprises four components: (1) Aims: what do you want your intervention to achieve and for whom? (2) Ingredients: what comprises the intervention? (3) Mechanisms: how do you propose the intervention will work? and (4) Delivery: how will you deliver the intervention? Conclusions: The draft simplified framework was validated with reference to a wide range of relevant literature and improvements have enhanced useability. The AIMD framework could aid in the promotion of evidence into practice, remove barriers to understanding how interventions work, enhance communication of interventions and support knowledge synthesis. Future work needs to focus on developing and testing resources and educational initiatives to optimize use of the AIMD framework in collaboration with relevant end-user groups.
Original languageEnglish
Article number38
Pages (from-to)1-11
Number of pages11
JournalBMC Medical Research Methodology
Volume17
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017

Keywords

  • Dissemination and implementation
  • Framework validation
  • Healthcare quality improvement
  • Implementation science
  • Knowledge translation

Cite this

Bragge, Peter ; Grimshaw, Jeremy M. ; Lokker, Cynthia ; Colquhoun, Heather ; Albrecht, Lauren ; Baron, Justine ; Dadich, Ann ; Damschroder, Laura ; Danko, Kristin ; Fernandez, Maria E. ; Flottorp, Signe Agnes ; Gainforth, Heather L. ; Gooding, Kate ; Graham, Ian D. ; Hempel, Susanne ; Kitto, Simon ; Leeman, Jennifer ; Mazza, Danielle ; McKibbon, Ann ; Michie, Susan ; Nuckols, Teryl ; Ovretveit, John ; Peters, Gjalt Jorn Y ; Sax, Hugo ; Scott, Shannon D. ; Stevens, Kathleen R. ; Wilson, Michael G. / AIMD : A validated, simplified framework of interventions to promote and integrate evidence into health practices, systems, and policies. In: BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2017 ; Vol. 17, No. 1. pp. 1-11.
@article{ac6e7b3260ca48e899c311e8c479d896,
title = "AIMD: A validated, simplified framework of interventions to promote and integrate evidence into health practices, systems, and policies",
abstract = "Background: Proliferation of terms describing the science of effectively promoting and supporting the use of research evidence in healthcare policy and practice has hampered understanding and development of the field. To address this, an international Terminology Working Group developed and published a simplified framework of interventions to promote and integrate evidence into health practices, systems, and policies. This paper presents results of validation work and a second international workgroup meeting, culminating in the updated AIMD framework [Aims, Ingredients, Mechanism, Delivery]. Methods: Framework validity was evaluated against terminology schemas (n = 51); primary studies (n = 37); and reporting guidelines (n = 10). Framework components were independently categorized as fully represented, partly represented, or absent by two researchers. Opportunities to refine the framework were systematically recorded. A meeting of the expanded international Terminology Working Group updated the framework by reviewing and deliberating upon validation findings and refinement proposals. Results: There was variation in representativeness of the components across the three types of literature, in particular for the component 'causal mechanisms'. Analysis of primary studies revealed that representativeness of this concept lowered from 92 to 68{\%} if only explicit, rather than explicit and non-explicit references to causal mechanisms were included. All components were very well represented in reporting guidelines, however the level of description of these was lower than in other types of literature. Twelve opportunities were identified to improve the framework, 9 of which were operationalized at the meeting. The updated AIMD framework comprises four components: (1) Aims: what do you want your intervention to achieve and for whom? (2) Ingredients: what comprises the intervention? (3) Mechanisms: how do you propose the intervention will work? and (4) Delivery: how will you deliver the intervention? Conclusions: The draft simplified framework was validated with reference to a wide range of relevant literature and improvements have enhanced useability. The AIMD framework could aid in the promotion of evidence into practice, remove barriers to understanding how interventions work, enhance communication of interventions and support knowledge synthesis. Future work needs to focus on developing and testing resources and educational initiatives to optimize use of the AIMD framework in collaboration with relevant end-user groups.",
keywords = "Dissemination and implementation, Framework validation, Healthcare quality improvement, Implementation science, Knowledge translation",
author = "Peter Bragge and Grimshaw, {Jeremy M.} and Cynthia Lokker and Heather Colquhoun and Lauren Albrecht and Justine Baron and Ann Dadich and Laura Damschroder and Kristin Danko and Fernandez, {Maria E.} and Flottorp, {Signe Agnes} and Gainforth, {Heather L.} and Kate Gooding and Graham, {Ian D.} and Susanne Hempel and Simon Kitto and Jennifer Leeman and Danielle Mazza and Ann McKibbon and Susan Michie and Teryl Nuckols and John Ovretveit and Peters, {Gjalt Jorn Y} and Hugo Sax and Scott, {Shannon D.} and Stevens, {Kathleen R.} and Wilson, {Michael G.}",
year = "2017",
doi = "10.1186/s12874-017-0314-8",
language = "English",
volume = "17",
pages = "1--11",
journal = "BMC Medical Research Methodology",
issn = "1471-2288",
publisher = "Springer-Verlag London Ltd.",
number = "1",

}

Bragge, P, Grimshaw, JM, Lokker, C, Colquhoun, H, Albrecht, L, Baron, J, Dadich, A, Damschroder, L, Danko, K, Fernandez, ME, Flottorp, SA, Gainforth, HL, Gooding, K, Graham, ID, Hempel, S, Kitto, S, Leeman, J, Mazza, D, McKibbon, A, Michie, S, Nuckols, T, Ovretveit, J, Peters, GJY, Sax, H, Scott, SD, Stevens, KR & Wilson, MG 2017, 'AIMD: A validated, simplified framework of interventions to promote and integrate evidence into health practices, systems, and policies', BMC Medical Research Methodology, vol. 17, no. 1, 38, pp. 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-017-0314-8

AIMD : A validated, simplified framework of interventions to promote and integrate evidence into health practices, systems, and policies. / Bragge, Peter; Grimshaw, Jeremy M.; Lokker, Cynthia; Colquhoun, Heather; Albrecht, Lauren; Baron, Justine; Dadich, Ann; Damschroder, Laura; Danko, Kristin; Fernandez, Maria E.; Flottorp, Signe Agnes; Gainforth, Heather L.; Gooding, Kate; Graham, Ian D.; Hempel, Susanne; Kitto, Simon; Leeman, Jennifer; Mazza, Danielle; McKibbon, Ann; Michie, Susan; Nuckols, Teryl; Ovretveit, John; Peters, Gjalt Jorn Y; Sax, Hugo; Scott, Shannon D.; Stevens, Kathleen R.; Wilson, Michael G.

In: BMC Medical Research Methodology, Vol. 17, No. 1, 38, 2017, p. 1-11.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - AIMD

T2 - A validated, simplified framework of interventions to promote and integrate evidence into health practices, systems, and policies

AU - Bragge, Peter

AU - Grimshaw, Jeremy M.

AU - Lokker, Cynthia

AU - Colquhoun, Heather

AU - Albrecht, Lauren

AU - Baron, Justine

AU - Dadich, Ann

AU - Damschroder, Laura

AU - Danko, Kristin

AU - Fernandez, Maria E.

AU - Flottorp, Signe Agnes

AU - Gainforth, Heather L.

AU - Gooding, Kate

AU - Graham, Ian D.

AU - Hempel, Susanne

AU - Kitto, Simon

AU - Leeman, Jennifer

AU - Mazza, Danielle

AU - McKibbon, Ann

AU - Michie, Susan

AU - Nuckols, Teryl

AU - Ovretveit, John

AU - Peters, Gjalt Jorn Y

AU - Sax, Hugo

AU - Scott, Shannon D.

AU - Stevens, Kathleen R.

AU - Wilson, Michael G.

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - Background: Proliferation of terms describing the science of effectively promoting and supporting the use of research evidence in healthcare policy and practice has hampered understanding and development of the field. To address this, an international Terminology Working Group developed and published a simplified framework of interventions to promote and integrate evidence into health practices, systems, and policies. This paper presents results of validation work and a second international workgroup meeting, culminating in the updated AIMD framework [Aims, Ingredients, Mechanism, Delivery]. Methods: Framework validity was evaluated against terminology schemas (n = 51); primary studies (n = 37); and reporting guidelines (n = 10). Framework components were independently categorized as fully represented, partly represented, or absent by two researchers. Opportunities to refine the framework were systematically recorded. A meeting of the expanded international Terminology Working Group updated the framework by reviewing and deliberating upon validation findings and refinement proposals. Results: There was variation in representativeness of the components across the three types of literature, in particular for the component 'causal mechanisms'. Analysis of primary studies revealed that representativeness of this concept lowered from 92 to 68% if only explicit, rather than explicit and non-explicit references to causal mechanisms were included. All components were very well represented in reporting guidelines, however the level of description of these was lower than in other types of literature. Twelve opportunities were identified to improve the framework, 9 of which were operationalized at the meeting. The updated AIMD framework comprises four components: (1) Aims: what do you want your intervention to achieve and for whom? (2) Ingredients: what comprises the intervention? (3) Mechanisms: how do you propose the intervention will work? and (4) Delivery: how will you deliver the intervention? Conclusions: The draft simplified framework was validated with reference to a wide range of relevant literature and improvements have enhanced useability. The AIMD framework could aid in the promotion of evidence into practice, remove barriers to understanding how interventions work, enhance communication of interventions and support knowledge synthesis. Future work needs to focus on developing and testing resources and educational initiatives to optimize use of the AIMD framework in collaboration with relevant end-user groups.

AB - Background: Proliferation of terms describing the science of effectively promoting and supporting the use of research evidence in healthcare policy and practice has hampered understanding and development of the field. To address this, an international Terminology Working Group developed and published a simplified framework of interventions to promote and integrate evidence into health practices, systems, and policies. This paper presents results of validation work and a second international workgroup meeting, culminating in the updated AIMD framework [Aims, Ingredients, Mechanism, Delivery]. Methods: Framework validity was evaluated against terminology schemas (n = 51); primary studies (n = 37); and reporting guidelines (n = 10). Framework components were independently categorized as fully represented, partly represented, or absent by two researchers. Opportunities to refine the framework were systematically recorded. A meeting of the expanded international Terminology Working Group updated the framework by reviewing and deliberating upon validation findings and refinement proposals. Results: There was variation in representativeness of the components across the three types of literature, in particular for the component 'causal mechanisms'. Analysis of primary studies revealed that representativeness of this concept lowered from 92 to 68% if only explicit, rather than explicit and non-explicit references to causal mechanisms were included. All components were very well represented in reporting guidelines, however the level of description of these was lower than in other types of literature. Twelve opportunities were identified to improve the framework, 9 of which were operationalized at the meeting. The updated AIMD framework comprises four components: (1) Aims: what do you want your intervention to achieve and for whom? (2) Ingredients: what comprises the intervention? (3) Mechanisms: how do you propose the intervention will work? and (4) Delivery: how will you deliver the intervention? Conclusions: The draft simplified framework was validated with reference to a wide range of relevant literature and improvements have enhanced useability. The AIMD framework could aid in the promotion of evidence into practice, remove barriers to understanding how interventions work, enhance communication of interventions and support knowledge synthesis. Future work needs to focus on developing and testing resources and educational initiatives to optimize use of the AIMD framework in collaboration with relevant end-user groups.

KW - Dissemination and implementation

KW - Framework validation

KW - Healthcare quality improvement

KW - Implementation science

KW - Knowledge translation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85014462123&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1186/s12874-017-0314-8

DO - 10.1186/s12874-017-0314-8

M3 - Article

VL - 17

SP - 1

EP - 11

JO - BMC Medical Research Methodology

JF - BMC Medical Research Methodology

SN - 1471-2288

IS - 1

M1 - 38

ER -