PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
August 22, 2025Implementation Science Communications23 citationsOpen Access

Key determinants in implementation processes: a systematic review using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR)

MSM. SchmittMHMaren HawkinsPFPaul Florsheim

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Contextual factors, or determinants, are commonly assessed in implementation studies due to their impact on the implementation process. While a substantial number of determinants have been identified, less research has examined the strength of their impact on the implementation process. Identification of key determinants, or those found to play the biggest role in the implementation process more frequently, may assist in guiding implementation of health programs and services. Damschroder & Lowery (2013) developed a rating system to assess which Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) constructs have the strongest impact on implementation. The purpose of this article was to systematically review articles that have utilized this rating system in order to identify key determinants. METHODS: We conducted forward citation searching of articles citing Damschroder & Lowery's (2013) rating criteria in three databases (PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar) in February 2023. Included articles examined the magnitude and valence of factors affecting the implementation process. Quality appraisal was completed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). Articles were included regardless of design, setting, location, or target population. A comprehensive examination of the determinants through numerous graphs and tables was conducted to identify key determinants. RESULTS: Forty-eight articles were included in the final review. Eight key determinants were identified: Leadership Engagement, Formally Appointed Internal Implementation Leaders, Compatibility, Available Resources, External Change Agents, Champions, Relative Advantage, and Key Stakeholders. CONCLUSIONS: A more systematic approach to guiding implementation efforts will lead to the development of effective implementation strategies that could ultimately improve implementation outcomes. While quantifying qualitative data inherently removes some important nuance, by identifying key determinants, we hope to help researchers and practitioners identify which factors are likely to facilitate success of their implementation efforts. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol for this systematic review was published with PROSPERO (CRD42023416340).

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Schmitt et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a5f6492a58c95525c60461bhttps://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-025-00712-1
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018 for information professionals and researchers2018 · 4,570 citations
  2. 2Diffusion of innovations2003 · 6,825 citations
  3. 3Implementation of peer support in mental health services: A systematic review of the literature.2021 · 178 citations
  4. 4Development of an integrative coding framework for evaluating context within implementation science2020 · 52 citations
  5. 5Development and refinement of a clinician intervention to facilitate primary care patient use of the PTSD Coach app2016 · 50 citations