Grants & Funding



What is the difference between Implementation Science and Quality Improvement?

Both implementation science and quality improvement (QI) share the goal of improving the quality of healthcare. Methods used in the two fields often overlap. However, QI efforts usually begin with a specific problem in a specific healthcare system, recognized at the level of the provider, clinic, or health system, and lead to the design and trial of strategies to improve a specific problem for that specific healthcare system. In contrast, Implementation Science typically begins with an evidence-based practice that is underutilized, and then identifies and addresses gaps at the provider, clinic, or healthcare system level. Additionally, implementation science, as a science, takes as part of its mission an explicit goal of developing generalizable knowledge that can be widely applied beyond the individual system under study.

How do I decide if a hybrid design is indicated?

Hybrid effectiveness-Implementation study designs are appropriate when there is evidence for efficacy of the practice of interest, but only partial evidence for effectiveness. The hybrid effectiveness-implementation design allows the researcher to gain additional information about effectiveness while studying implementation.

To learn more, read this article.

How do I decide what intervention is ready for an implementation science study?

Several approaches have been described to assess whether a potential intervention, or practice is suitable for an Implementation Study. Factors to consider include the strength of evidence for the intervention, usability of the intervention, alignment with organizational and system values and ongoing initiatives, capacity to implement, perception of need, availability of necessary support. A useful tool to assess readiness is the “Hexagon tool.”

Click here for a link to the "Hexagon tool"

What is the Hexagon tool?

The Hexagon tool was developed to assess readiness of an intervention for implementation

What are Implementation Science Theories, Models and Frameworks?

As the field of Implementation Science has evolved, numerous Theories, Models and Frameworks have been proposed. Generally, a theory contains principles or statements designed to structure our observation, understanding and explanation of the world. In contrast, a model typically provides a deliberate simplification of some phenomenon. And a framework usually presents a structure or system to represent relationships between elements but does not aim to provide any explanation. The theories, models and frameworks for Implementation Science generally fall into the following categories:

  • Process models
  • Determinant frameworks
  • Classic theories
  • Implementation theories
  • Evaluation framework

To learn more, read this article.

How can I map out a plan for studying implementation of an intervention or practice?

The process of developing, testing and scaling an implementation plan includes numerous steps. This roadmap provides an approach to this process link to roadmap

What are Implementation Science outcome measures?

Implementation outcome measures are used to assess the implementation of an intervention in an implementation research study. Here are some common Implementation Science outcome measures:

  • Acceptability: Perception among implementation stakeholders that a given treatment, service, practice, or innovation is agreeable, palatable, or satisfactory.
  • Adoption: Intention, initial decision, or action to try or actually employ an innovation or evidence-based practice
  • Appropriateness: Perceived fit, relevance, or compatibility of the innovation or evidence based practice for a given practice setting, provider, or consumer; and/or perceived fit of the innovation to address a particular issue or problem
  • Feasibility: The extent to which a new treatment or innovation can be successfully used or carried out within a given agency or setting
  • Fidelity : The degree to which an intervention was implemented as it was prescribed in the original protocol or as it was intended by program developers.
  • Implementation Cost: Cost impact of an implementation effort (dependent on complexity of intervention, complexity of implementation strategy, and characteristics of setting)
  • Penetration: Integration within a service setting and its subsystems. Reflects “depth” of implementation in target sites. For example, # sites within a network adopting intervention/ # network sites exposed OR # of providers delivering intervention/ # of providers trained, OR # eligible persons who use a service/ # eligible persons
  • Sustainability: The extent to which a newly implemented treatment is maintained or institutionalized within a service setting’s ongoing operations