Theoretical Framework For Translation Of Evidence Into Nursing/Midwifery Practice Essay.

Evidence Translation Significance

The aim of this chapter is to demonstrate the author’s understanding of the significance of evidence translation in nursing and midwifery practice, and the different aspects of implementation science applicable to the health care system. This chapter discusses the theoretical background on which current evidence translation and implementation science in modern health care is based. It also introduces the latest literature and research findings on critical methodological approaches. Evidence translation is considered a process that involves bringing information from various sources and disciplines in order to inform decisions or debates with respect to a specific issue. Even with good practice, there is a lack of supply and demand for synthesized evidence (Braithwaite et al. 2020). The research funding and evaluation systems value original research and there is a lack of communication and understanding between the researcher and policymakers in the creation of unintended disconnection between the policymakers and researchers offering insight (Thompson et al. 2007). The theoretical background and principles of evidence translation and implementation of new changes in the health care sector are revealed in this section. It aims to provide a clear and strong foundation for the plan of translation of the research findings to an implementation proposal through various theories, principles, and research findings.  The aim of the study is to investigate whether early mobilization in adult ventilated patients would help reduce the incidence of ICU acquired weakness, during their immediate recovery period.

“Knowledge Translation is defined as a dynamic and iterative process that includes synthesis, dissemination, exchange, and ethically sound application of knowledge to improve the health of Canadians, provide more effective health services and products and strengthen the health care system” (Canadian Institute of Health Research, 2016, p.1). The process of evidence translation is complex. Translating the strongest research evidence can result in a more transparent and long-lasting healthcare system, with nurses at the center. Evidence translation can result in great, behavioural, and practice change, bridging the research-practice gap (Curtis et al., 2017).

The meaning and concept of evidence in health care have been viewed in terms of proof and rationality (Rycroft-Malone et al., 2004). (Rycroft-Malone et al., 2004) cited Higgs & Jones (2000) to propose evidence in evidence-based practice (EBP) as it should be considered to be “knowledge derived from a variety of sources that has been subjected to testing and has found to be credible”. The nursing practice is made efficient through effective communication and interaction between the patients and practitioners using many sources of best available evidence. There are four types of evidence that are integrated to bring the best EBP to the patients, such as research, clinical experience, patient experience, and information from the local context. In the delivery of evidence-based health care, research evidence has taken precedence over other forms of information. Where ever available, it is important to bring robust research evidence to support nursing interventions. Knowledge acquired through professional practice and life experience plays another crucial role to support EBP. The third component is patient experience, ethical and moral experiences and preferences of individuals should be key components in the EBP. But their role is never acknowledged in reality. The fourth type of evidence includes the local context which include the information such as understanding of social and cultural aspects of the organization, audited data, local and national policies, and so on ((Rycroft-Malone et al., 2004). But, (Rycroft-Malone et al., 2004) propose that individualized evidence based health care not only requires professional craft reasoning but also demands such knowledge and reasoning to integrate all four areas of evidence mentioned above with in the clinical environment’s contextual constraints.

The Meaning and Concept of Evidence in Health Care

Evidence based practice (EBP) is stated to be an integration of best research evidence with regard to clinical expertise and patient values. It can be applied by the researcher that help in improving outcome. It is a process that involve collection, processing and implementation of research findings. With the incorporation of up-to-date information from an EBP research, the researcher can able to answer the research question in the current practice (Horntvedt et al. 2018). In this, the comparison between current professional and clinical practices with respect to new research facts and results has emerged. EBP is huge because it means to give the best thought that is available, completely expectation on dealing with calm outcomes. Patients desire to get the best thought taking into account the best open verification. EBP in like manner expects a section in ensuring that restricted prosperity resources are used keenly and that appropriate confirmation is seen as when decisions are made about financing prosperity organizations (Xu et al. 2020). Before EBP prosperity specialists relied upon the direction of extra achieved partners, much of the time completely paid attention to, their gut, and on what they were taught as students. Experience is obligated to imperfections of tendency and what we understand as students can promptly become old. Contingent upon additional laid out, more capable accomplices as a sole information source can give dated, uneven and mixed up information. It isn't really the situation that clinical experience isn't critical - it is there of psyche of the importance of EBP (Albarqouni et al. 2018). In any case, rather than relying upon clinical experience alone for route, prosperity specialists need to use clinical experience alongside various kinds of evidence based data.

Translation science is fiery, and disregarding how there is a making social event of information around here, we have, until this point, different unanswered solicitations. These coordinate the kind of overview and data (e.g., rehash, content, plan) methodology that are great, the attributes of assessment initiates that are fundamental for progress, the control of express setting factors, and the blend of procedures that are great. We besides have barely any information into utilization of custom fitted execution mediations, or the key setting credits to survey and use in making and testing extraordinarily created interventions. Such clinical updates that are best for making EBP information accessible at the quality of care require further observational clarification. We additionally have barely any information on the power and mediation part of single and various systems that are solid for advancing and supporting utilization of EBPs or how the adequacy contrasts by kind of point (e.g., clear versus complex). As a matter of fact has the setting of care transport been seen as influencing use of check, and further distinct work is supposed around here to see the value in how complex adaptable designs of getting ready integrate information acquisition and use. Finally, we don't have even the remotest sign what systems or blend of approaches work for whom, in what setting, why they work in unambiguous settings or cases and not others, and what is the instrument by which these methods or mix of structures work.

Evidence-Based Practice

According to (White), there are five inevitable factors that persuade health care workers in the increasing complexity of health care system to rely on EBP. They are; the great visibility of the healthcare quality and safety movement, incredible increase in new knowledge available to today's healthcare workers, the healthcare researches that has indicated that there is a significant delay in adopting new evidence into clinical practice, lack of time to update own knowledge with the latest knowledge available today related to best practice, and massive consumer pressure as the public have online access to the updated knowledge on various topics, from the published research outcomes. According to (Rycroft-Malone et al., 2004), to develop and use a broader evidence base that includes above mentioned four types of evidence in nursing practice require development of a process which includes interaction of scientific and experiential knowledge. The challenge is to ensure that each piece of evidence is as robust as feasible while yet providing personalized care. This could suggest that research evidence meet agreed-upon rigour and trustworthiness requirements. To formulate approved principles for identifying whether research evidence is acceptable and valuable for a certain patient/context and how it can be used would necessitate empirical research on how expert practitioners make use of evidence in their decision making (Rycroft-Malone et al., 2004).  

In the past, a decade ago, medical professionals believed that the translation of study results into practice were carried out in accordance with a set of research steps, from ‘test tube to needle’, or ‘bench to bedside’.   The concept of a 'pipeline' was often used as a criterion for analyzing research uptake. (Braithwaite et al., 2018). In an attempt to conceptualize the multidimensional process of knowledge translation, a range of models and theories have been established (Greenhalgh and Papoutsi, 2018). Mezirow's transformation learning theory (Mezirow 1978, 2000, 2004) aids knowledge translation by recognizing the role and impact of attitudes and beliefs, which are frequently highlighted as roadblocks to research usage (Greenhalgh and Papoutsi, 2018) sited (MacDonald 2002, Brown & McCormack 2005, Davies et al. 2007, Newhouse 2007).

Gaps between evidence and decision-making occur at all levels of health care, including those of patients, health care professionals and policy-makers. The lack of skills in knowledge management and infrastructure is a common difficulty that all decision-makers (i.e., clinicians, patients, managers, and policy-makers) encounter (i.e., the sheer volume of research evidence currently produced, access to research evidence, time to read and the skills to appraise, understand and apply research evidence) (Straus et al., 2009).The three immediate and internationally recognized challenges that have a significant impact on nurses' ability to provide evidence-based care are: 1) Healthcare system limitations, which results in very little support for their education and development; 2) Prejudice against their desire to expand their profession; and 3) Workforce-related issues (Correa-de-Araujo, 2016). (Curtis et al., 2017) cited (Haynes & Haines 1998, Wallis 2012), to state that Clinician behavior, a lack of time, difficulty formulating evidence-based or informed policies, a lack of continuing education, and an unsupportive organizational culture are considered as barriers to evidence translation. The PARIHS (Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services) framework established by Kitson and colleagues is a particularly effective approach for analyzing the implementation of quality improvement interventions in health care settings. The PARIHS framework suggests three factors for successful implementation such as evidence, context, and facilitation (Ward et al., 2017).

Translation Science

The basic reliable in clinical thought relationship, as the saying goes, is change. Mechanical developments, creating masses, changing affliction plans and new divulgences for the treatment of infections require clinical thought affiliations and experts to change steadily. Different evened out changes are besides expected to address making normal practices and values, some of which have yielded better rules for authorization to clinical advantages, managed figuring out experience and broadened patient thought in care free bearing (Nilsen et al. 2020). Steady expert direction has become progressively essential to guarantee that clinical thought experts' abilities keep alert with current norms and to remain mindful of and upgrade the information and limits expected to keep awake with the most recent with the freshest confirmation. If all else fails, changes can be trying since they struggle with people's principal need for a steady climate. Research has shown that genuine changes are routinely connected with specialists' mental shortcoming about what the developments will mean for their work circumstance, work and all around life (Nilsen et al. 2018). High rates of different evened out change really impact specialist success and flourishing, as evaluated by a degree of pointers, for example lessened authentic obligation, loss of viability, business related pressure, precious weariness, mental thriving issues, change deficiency, awful self-surveyed thriving, inconvenient rest plans, burden nonappearance, clinical focus verifications and stress-related fixes.

“Implementation research is the scientific study of methods to promote the systematic uptake of research findings and other evidence-based practices into routine practice, and, hence, to improve the quality and effectiveness of health services and care” (Eccles and Mittman, 2006). According to (May et al., 2016), the process of implementation consists of translational initiatives that bring healthcare interventions beyond the closed systems of evaluation studies and into the open systems of real-world situations. Implementation must be viewed as an ongoing and interactive process rather than a final product from the beginning. Furthermore, the term "implementation" is never used to refer to a particular "thing" that needs to be implemented (May, 2013). The goal of implementation science is to examine and address important contextual elements (such as social, behavioral, economic, and management) that inhibit successful implementation, as well as test new ways and establish causal relations (Curtis et al., 2017) cited (Fogarty International Center 2013). To aid with successful implementation process, many implementation theories have been developed. However, the constructs contained in each theory overlap significantly, and a comparison of theories reveals that each is lacking crucial constructs found in other theories. Moreover, language and definitions differ amongst theories (Damschroder et al., 2009). So they developed Consolidated Framework For Implementation Research (CFIR). By accepting, combining, and unifying essential constructs from existing implementation theories, the CFIR provides a pragmatic foundation for handling complex, interacting, multi-level, and transient states of constructs in the actual world. It can be used to direct formative evaluations and establish a knowledge foundation for implementation across a variety of studies and contexts (Damschroder et al., 2009).

Headway is involved thoroughly to give and convey clinical thought overall. e-Health (the utilization of data, PC or correspondence progression to explicit bits of flourishing or clinical advantages) is seen as essential for managing issues going toward clinical advantages frameworks of developing requesting, by virtue of a creating individuals and further made medicines, and restricted assets (Rowe et al. 2021). By the by, disregarding how there is all over plan about the significance and likely advantages of e-flourishing, certification of these advantages has a large part of the time been more postponed than expected, frequently considering issues with execution. For instance, in the UK, the National Health Service (NHS) Five Year Forward View communicates the need to utilize open flourishing headways (Mazzotti et al. 2021).

In implementation research, the set of conditions or unique characteristics that surround a given implementation endeavor is referred to as 'context' (Damschroder et al., 2009).  For complex intervention and implementation trials, context is a major practical problem. These are guided by a research model that strives to demonstrate the operation of causal mechanisms, eliminate confounders, and quantify outcomes. Longitudinal studies that particularly study sustainability and scaling up which focus on implementation processes are uncommon. Hence, we have limited knowledge about the mechanisms involved in adaptation and sustainability over time. Yet, there are considerable literatures available on aspects of context applicable to implementation research (May et al., 2016). The importance of context in implementation science is shown in the many theories, frameworks, models, and taxonomies developed to study implementation determinants (Nilsen and Bernhardsson, 2019). The researcher's challenge is determining the most relevant context dimensions and addressing them in the research. Although it is difficult to capture all potentially relevant factors in any given study, identifying key context dimensions can help researchers conduct research that includes a theory of context, or assumptions about how different dimensions interact and determine implementation outcomes (Nilsen and Bernhardsson, 2019). A recent systematic review by (Rogers et al., 2020) brought the conclusion that most studies failed to employ a consistent strategy, emphasizing the necessity for researchers to define, assess, and analyze the context in a consistent manner. Improved clarity and consistency in examining context could lead to better implementation processes.

An intervention is defined as “a specified set of activities designed to put into practice an activity of known dimensions” (Moir, 2018) cited (Fixsen et al., 2005). The main characteristics of intervention in implementation science are as followed.

1. intervention source: An intervention can be generated internally as a good idea, solution to an issue, or other grassroots effort, or it can be developed externally such as by a vendor or research group. The credibility of the source may also have an impact on implementation (Damschroder et al., 2009),Pp. 6-7) cited (Greenhalgh et al., 2004).

2. Evidence strength and quality:  It can be described as Stakeholders' assessments of the quality and validity of evidence supporting the intervention's success. Published literature, guidelines, anecdotal anecdotes from colleagues, competitor information, patient experiences, outcomes from a local pilot, and other sources of evidence may be used (Damschroder et al., 2009),Pp. 6-7) citing Malone (2002), and Stetler CB (2001).

3. Relative advantage: Stakeholders' perceptions of the intervention's benefits compared to other solutions (Damschroder et al., 2009),Pp. 6-7)  Gustafson (2003).

4. Adaptability: It is the extent to which an intervention can be adapted, adjusted, or redesigned to meet local demands (Damschroder et al., 2009).

5. Trialability: The possibility to test the intervention in the organization on a small scale

6. Complexity:  It is described as perceived difficulty of implementation expressed by duration, scope, radicalness, disruptiveness, centrality, and intricacy and number of steps of implementation (Damschroder et al., 2009),Pp. 6-7) cited (Greenhalgh et al., 2004).

7. Design quality and packaging: The intervention is perceived to be of high quality in terms of how it is packaged, presented, and put together  (Damschroder et al., 2009),Pp. 6-7)  cited Klein KJ, Conn AB, Sorra JS, (2001).

8. Cost: It includes cost of intervention and implementation, comprising supply, investment, and opportunity costs. It is critical to distinguish this construct from existing resources (Damschroder et al., 2009).

The use of intercessions with a current proof base could be more productive than the improvement of new mediations for every unique circumstance. Nonetheless, impacts frequently rely upon the context. Hence, intercessions that are basically repeated may be more averse to duplicate impacts than those adjusted to accomplish a solid match among mediation and setting (Trainor et al. 2020). Circumstances in which variation may be required incorporate shipping a mediation to another setting or focusing on various populaces, for example, adjusting for sociocultural groups. Variations could intend to keep away from imbalances produced from mediations, by guaranteeing that intercessions conveyed at the populace level are touchy to the requirements of impeded groups.10 When impacts are not imitated in new settings, in any case, it tends to be hard to decide if this outcome is because of unseemly transformation, shortcomings in unique proof, systems that don't work in the new setting, or another clarification.

Translational initiatives that extend healthcare interventions beyond the closed systems of evaluation studies and into the open systems of 'real world' situations are referred to as implementation. Interactions and discussions between participants and contexts determine the outcome of these processes. Plasticity of intervention components, participants' choice over resource mobilization and actors' contributions, and the elasticity of contexts all play crucial roles in these agreements (May et al., 2016).

Interdisciplinary healthcare teams are considered as Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS) as the interaction of team members is prioritized over individual team member characteristics (Pype et al., 2018). The translation of evidence to new health care settings occurs in an unpredictable environment where individuals with different levels of capacity, time, culture, and capabilities interact. Hence, implementation of new interventions to health care system is not easy (Braithwaite et al., 2018).

Early mobilisation while the patient is actually ventilated has been proposed as a promising intercession to kill ICU-AW, and research recommends it is a gotten and possible intervention. The term 'early gathering in definitively ventilated patients' (EM-MV) is used proportionally in the composition and is a portion of the time suggested as early rebuilding, early convenientce, moderate flexibility and early ambulation. While there is a concurrence as for some place safe standards to get ready unequivocally ventilated patients and genuine reclamation for ICU survivors, there is at present no united importance of EM-MV (Achola 2019). This shortfall of definition impacts on the generalisability of studies, their versatility while doing EM-MV into preparing and the direct of future assessment.

“Adaptation, a key concept in implementation, has been defined as a process of thoughtful and deliberate alteration to the design or delivery of an intervention, with the goal of improving its fit or effectiveness in a given context”. (Wiltsey Stirman et al., 2019)P.1). Adaptations offer greater flexibility in implementation, allowing an intervention to better meet the needs of a new organization, population, or context. Adaptation is multifaceted and dynamic; several adaptations may be formed for a single intervention (Kirk et al., 2020). The Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications-Enhanced (FRAME) is one of the most comprehensive and updated adaptation classification frameworks, and it aids implementation researchers in consistently describing many features of adaptations (Kirk et al., 2020) Cited (Stirman SW, 2019), P.2).

Implementation fidelity measures the extent to which the implementation has delivered in a way the designers of the programme has planned. By understanding if the implementation has done with fidelity, then only the stakeholders can analyze how effective is the outcome, and determine the scope of adaptation and improvements (Carroll et al., 2007). (Carroll et al., 2007) developed a conceptual framework for explaining fidelity with five components such as adherence, moderators, intervention complexity, facilitation strategies, quality of delivery, participant responsiveness, relationship between moderators, and measurement. Firstly, adherence is the level to which an implementation complies with the designed content, frequency, duration, and coverage. If a complete adherence is maintained in an implementation, fidelity can be high. To identify which is essential component to adhere with, it is required to perform a component analysis combining data on fidelity of implementation and performance outcomes from other studies of the same intervention (Carroll et al., 2007).  Secondly, an intervention's description can be simple or complex, detailed or vague. A simple intervention is easier to achieve high fidelity than a complex one, because of the less “response barrier” ((Carroll et al., 2007) cited  Dusenbury L(2003), P. 5). Furthermore, moderator is another factor that affects fidelity. There can be number of moderators depending on the nature of intervention. Accurate facilitation strategies, which means the guidelines and training supports given to standardize the implementation, and monitoring and feedback are directly proportional to high fidelity. The significance of quality of delivery can be acknowledged by monitoring and feedback of the implementation process and its effect on fidelity. The participants of the intervention including the receiver and the provider of the intervention has to have positive attitude and willingness to take effort to implement the intervention correctly also demonstrate high fidelity. The collaboration among these moderators may have an even greater impact on the association between an intervention and its fidelity. Finally, this conceptual framework strongly suggests that the evaluation of all these above mentioned factors is required to accurately measure implementation fidelity (Carroll et al., 2007).

Level of help allude the degree of help that include precisely ventilated patients if there should be an occurrence of requiring EM-MV exercises. Patients include attempt exercises in a free way or being upheld by staff or other blend with gear. The most regularly hardware that has been found for this situation is slant table. According to the report of a few creator, for example, helping of a precisely ventilated patients in assembling, there is necessity of help between one to four individuals (Ruiz 2021). The staff individuals incorporate attendants, OTs, PTs, doctors, and RTs and non-clinicians includes seeing relatives and experts. EM-MV was consistently conveyed by a gathering including clinical and non-clinical staff. The multidisciplinary of EM-MV is reflected by the makers of included examinations going from clinical staff, nursing, PT, OT to RT either as individual or as multidisciplinary author(s). This is a huge point since different disciplinary establishment will impact on how EM-MV is portrayed and done. Future investigation needs to zero in on this point of view to support pieces of information from different master establishments.

Stakeholder engagement is critical for successful healthcare quality improvement, but it is challenging to achieve and track among different stakeholders. Term engagement is explained as an active and dedicated decision-making about a meaningful problem through courteous interactions and discourse where everyone's perspective is considered (Norris et al., 2017).

A study by (Ní Shé et al., 2020) highlighted the importance of four values: respect, openness, reciprocity, and flexibility, in the pre-commencement stage, which could encourage more inclusive and effective Public Patient Involvement (PPI) across all stages of involvement. Also this study identified the role of independent facilitators is also an important aspect to understand PPI. Another research by (Gray-Burrows et al., 2018) identified the roles of PPI in strong support in implementation science as; setting priority areas for research, assisting to identify and form research questions, suggesting appropriate methods of obtaining consent from participants, reviewing research funding, making arrangements for PPI meetings, sharing knowledge about research with other stakeholders, and providing guidance for upcoming research.

Complexity is described as “a dynamic and constantly emerging set of processes and objects that not only interact with each other, but come to be defined by those interactions” (Greenhalgh and Papoutsi, 2018) cited Plsek PE, Greenhalgh T (2001). “Contemporary health care system is experiencing a mismatch between ‘patient in the guideline’ and ‘patient in the bed’ due to multi-morbidity and interacting sociocultural influences” (Greenhalgh and Papoutsi, 2018), P.1). The characteristics of complexity are highly significant to the study of health services and systems. In health system, decisions must be made based on data that is incomplete or contested. People use their imagination to come up with adaptable solutions that work in their environment. Complexity science will not provide a simple solution to the inherent tensions and paradoxes in today's health systems, but it will enable us to focus on – and begin to research – uncomfortable knowledge, to reach good compromises, and to embrace creative, reflexive, and collaborative ways to work and think. (Greenhalgh and Papoutsi, 2018). As healthcare is conceived as a complex adaptive system, a sequential strategy for integrating evidence into normal practice is not practical. Complexity science reinforces the dynamic properties of systems and the persistently changing features that are intensely entangled in social practices, while also implying that any change process must account for multiple forces, variables, and influences, and that unpredictability and uncertainty are natural properties of non-linear, complex systems (Braithwaite et al., 2018).

The process of evidence translation is becoming more difficult than before. This realization was derived from the knowledge and understanding of human system by utilizing the resources from sociology, ecology, and evolutionary biology, and this change in the way of thought is called as “system thinking” (Malin and Rind 2022). The frameworks thinking approach appears differently in relation to conventional examination, which concentrates on frameworks by separating them into their different components. A building up process prompts the increment of some framework part. Assuming support is unrestrained by an adjusting cycle, it in the long run prompts breakdown (Edwards et al. 2019). For instance, in project the executives, winning insight might recommend the expansion of laborers to a venture that is slacking. In any case, by and by, that strategy could have really eased back advancement previously. System thinking utilizes virtual experience and a collection of charts and diagrams to display, show, and anticipate framework conduct (Cheng and Lau 2020).

The goal of implementation science is broadly covering three areas such as describing research translation process to practice (process models), to identify the influencing factors of implementation outcomes (determinant frameworks, classic theories, implementation theories), and evaluating the implementation of interventions (evaluation frameworks) (Braithwaite et al., 2018). Braithwaite et al. (2018) suggests that instead of treating the two theoretical paradigms implementation science and complexity science as mutually incompatible, it is beneficial for the clinical practice as well as the researchers if used together. It also contributes to system improvement. (Bauer et al., 2015) cited that Balas EA, Boren SA (2000) codified the concept of hybrid effectiveness- implementation designs, with the aim to combine those concepts and methodologies into a single framework. Hybrid designs create hypothesis for EBP and implementation effects by measuring implementation outcome and intervention outcome(Bauer et al., 2015). The ultimate goal of implementation research in healthcare is to improve the effectiveness of interventions to improve healthcare practice, resulting in better care and outcomes for patients and populations (Wensing and Grol, 2019). The hybrid approach may help to improve the final output of knowledge translation in health care practice by overcoming the struggle of complexity by accepting it and following the methodologies and frameworks of implementation.

Conclusion:

Evidence translation and implementation science are the most important area that are involved in bringing changes to the health care service system based on the robust research evidences. There are many challenges to implement new interventions as health care system being complex   adaptive system. Context, interventions, adaptation, fidelity and stakeholders’ engagement are major aspects that act as pillars of implementation science to execute evidence base practice to health care system with high fidelity. Organistaional changes in medical services are bound to succeed whenever medical care experts have the amazing chance to impact the change, feel ready for the change and perceive the worth of the change, including seeing the advantage of the change for patients. Despite the fact that adjustments of medical services associations are inescapable, there are something else or less successful ways of doing changes. Our outcomes give significant ramifications to medical services associations concerning how changes in medical services can be arranged, carried out and figured out how to build the possibilities that they will be upheld by medical services experts, which is vital for effective changes.

References: 

Achola, E.O., 2019. Practicing what we preach: Reclaiming the promise of multicultural transition programming. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 42(3), pp.188-193.

Albarqouni, L., Hoffmann, T., Straus, S., Olsen, N.R., Young, T., Ilic, D., Shaneyfelt, T., Haynes, R.B., Guyatt, G. and Glasziou, P., 2018. Core competencies in evidence-based practice for health professionals: consensus statement based on a systematic review and Delphi survey. JAMA network open, 1(2), pp.e180281-e180281.

Ames, H., Glenton, C. and Lewin, S., 2019. Purposive sampling in a qualitative evidence synthesis: A worked example from a synthesis on parental perceptions of vaccination communication. BMC medical research methodology, 19(1), pp.1-9.

BAUER, M. S., DAMSCHRODER, L., HAGEDORN, H., SMITH, J. & KILBOURNE, A. M. 2015. An introduction to implementation science for the non-specialist. BMC Psychology, 3, 32.

BRAITHWAITE, J., CHURRUCA, K., LONG, J. C., ELLIS, L. A. & HERKES, J. 2018. When complexity science meets implementation science: a theoretical and empirical analysis of systems change. BMC Medicine, 16, 63.

Canadian Institute of Health Research, (2016). “About knowledge translation and commercialization”. Available at: https://cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/29418.html. Assessed on February 10, 2022.

CARROLL, C., PATTERSON, M., WOOD, S., BOOTH, A., RICK, J. & BALAIN, S. 2007. A conceptual framework for implementation fidelity. Implementation Science, 2, 40.

Cheng, L.J. and Lau, Y., 2020. The state of the evidence for voluntary home?based human immunodeficiency virus counseling and testing in the community: A proposed model for evidence translation. Public Health Nursing, 37(4), pp.541-559.

CORREA-DE-ARAUJO, R. 2016. Evidence-Based Practice in the United States: Challenges, Progress, and Future Directions. Health care for women international, 37, 2-22.

CURTIS, K., FRY, M., SHABAN, R. Z. & CONSIDINE, J. 2017. Translating research findings to clinical nursing practice. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 26, 862-872.

DAMSCHRODER, L. J., ARON, D. C., KEITH, R. E., KIRSH, S. R., ALEXANDER, J. A. & LOWERY, J. C. 2009. Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implementation Science, 4, 50.

ECCLES, M. P. & MITTMAN, B. S. 2006. Welcome to Implementation Science. Implementation Science, 1, 1.

Edwards, A., Zweigenthal, V. and Olivier, J., 2019. Evidence map of knowledge translation strategies, outcomes, facilitators and barriers in African health systems. Health research policy and systems, 17(1), pp.1-14.

GRAY-BURROWS, K. A., WILLIS, T. A., FOY, R., RATHFELDER, M., BLAND, P., CHIN, A., HODGSON, S., IBEGBUNA, G., PRESTWICH, G., SAMUEL, K., WOOD, L., YAQOOB, F. & MCEACHAN, R. R. C. 2018. Role of patient and public involvement in implementation research: a consensus study. BMJ Quality & Safety, 27, 858.

GREENHALGH, T. & PAPOUTSI, C. 2018. Studying complexity in health services research: desperately seeking an overdue paradigm shift. BMC Medicine, 16, 95.

GREENHALGH, T., ROBERT, G., MACFARLANE, F., BATE, P. & KYRIAKIDOU, O. 2004. Diffusion of Innovations in Service Organizations: Systematic Review and Recommendations. The Milbank Quarterly, 82, 581-629.

Horntvedt, M.E.T., Nordsteien, A., Fermann, T. and Severinsson, E., 2018. Strategies for teaching evidence-based practice in nursing education: a thematic literature review. BMC medical education, 18(1), pp.1-11.

KIRK, M. A., MOORE, J. E., WILTSEY STIRMAN, S. & BIRKEN, S. A. 2020. Towards a comprehensive model for understanding adaptations’ impact: the model for adaptation design and impact (MADI). Implementation Science, 15, 56.

Malin, J.R. and Rind, G.M., 2022. Making the case for project?based learning: An examination of research evidence translation and mobilisation in education. Review of Education, 10(1), p.e3330.

MAY, C. 2013. Towards a general theory of implementation. Implementation Science, 8, 18.

MAY, C. R., JOHNSON, M. & FINCH, T. 2016. Implementation, context and complexity. Implementation Science, 11, 141.

Mazzotti, V.L., Rowe, D.A., Kwiatek, S., Voggt, A., Chang, W.H., Fowler, C.H., Poppen, M., Sinclair, J. and Test, D.W., 2021. Secondary transition predictors of postschool success: An update to the research base. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 44(1), pp.47-64.

MOIR, T. 2018. Why Is Implementation Science Important for Intervention Design and Evaluation Within Educational Settings? Frontiers in Education, 3.

NÍ SHÉ, É., CASSIDY, J., DAVIES, C., DE BRÚN, A., DONNELLY, S., DORRIS, E., DUNNE, N., EGAN, K., FOLEY, M., GALVIN, M., HARKIN, M., KILLILEA, M., KROLL, T., LACEY, V., LAMBERT, V., MCLOUGHLIN, S., MITCHELL, D., MURPHY, E., MWENDWA, P., NICHOLSON, E., O’DONNELL, D. & O’PHILBIN, L. 2020. Minding the gap: identifying values to enable public and patient involvement at the pre-commencement stage of research projects. Research Involvement and Engagement, 6, 46.

NILSEN, P. & BERNHARDSSON, S. 2019. Context matters in implementation science: a scoping review of determinant frameworks that describe contextual determinants for implementation outcomes. BMC Health Services Research, 19, 189.

Nilsen, P., Schildmeijer, K., Ericsson, C., Seing, I. and Birken, S., 2019. Implementation of change in health care in Sweden: a qualitative study of professionals’ change responses. Implementation Science, 14(1), pp.1-11.

Nilsen, P., Seing, I., Ericsson, C., Birken, S.A. and Schildmeijer, K., 2020. Characteristics of successful changes in health care organizations: an interview study with physicians, registered nurses and assistant nurses. BMC health services research, 20(1), pp.1-8.

NORRIS, J. M., WHITE, D. E., NOWELL, L., MRKLAS, K. & STELFOX, H. T. 2017. How do stakeholders from multiple hierarchical levels of a large provincial health system define engagement? A qualitative study. Implementation Science, 12, 98.

PYPE, P., MERTENS, F., HELEWAUT, F. & KRYSTALLIDOU, D. 2018. Healthcare teams as complex adaptive systems: understanding team behaviour through team members’ perception of interpersonal interaction. BMC Health Services Research, 18, 570.

ROGERS, L., DE BRÚN, A. & MCAULIFFE, E. 2020. Defining and assessing context in healthcare implementation studies: a systematic review. BMC health services research, 20, 591-591.

Rowe, D.A., Mazzotti, V.L., Fowler, C.H., Test, D.W., Mitchell, V.J., Clark, K.A., Holzberg, D., Owens, T.L., Rusher, D., Seaman-Tullis, R.L. and Gushanas, C.M., 2021. Updating the secondary transition research base: Evidence-and research-based practices in functional skills. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 44(1), pp.28-46.

Ruiz, A., 2021. Collaborative and Culturally Responsive Practices of Transition Professionals to Support Black Students with High Incidence Disabilities.

RYCROFT-MALONE, J., SEERS, K., TITCHEN, A., HARVEY, G., KITSON, A. & MCCORMACK, B. 2004. What counts as evidence in evidence-based practice? Journal of Advanced Nursing, 47, 81-90.

STRAUS, S. E., TETROE, J. & GRAHAM, I. 2009. Defining knowledge translation. CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne, 181, 165-168.

Trainor, A.A., Carter, E.W., Karpur, A., Martin, J.E., Mazzotti, V.L., Morningstar, M.E., Newman, L. and Rojewski, J.W., 2020. A framework for research in transition: Identifying important areas and intersections for future study. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 43(1), pp.5-17.

WARD, M. M., BALOH, J., ZHU, X. & STEWART, G. L. 2017. Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services framework applied to TeamSTEPPS implementation in small rural hospitals. Health care management review, 42, 2-13.

WENSING, M. & GROL, R. 2019. Knowledge translation in health: how implementation science could contribute more. BMC Medicine, 17, 88.

WHITE, K. M. Evidence-Based Practice and Its Implementation in Healthcare. In: WHITE, K. M., DUDLEY-BROWN, S. & TERHAAR, M. F. (eds.). New York: Springer Publishing Company.

WILTSEY STIRMAN, S., BAUMANN, A. A. & MILLER, C. J. 2019. The FRAME: an expanded framework for reporting adaptations and modifications to evidence-based interventions. Implementation Science, 14, 58.

Xu, G., Yang, Y., Du, Y., Peng, F., Hu, P., Wang, R., Yin, M., Li, T., Tu, L., Sun, J. and Jiang, T., 2020. Clinical pathway for early diagnosis of COVID-19: updates from experience to evidence-based practice. Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology, 59(1), pp.89-100.