Salīdzināt metodes
Apskatiet izvēlētās metodes blakus; rindas, kas atšķiras, ir izceltas.
| Zināšanu pārvēršana× | Ietvars RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance)× | |
|---|---|---|
| Nozare | Ieviešanas zinātne | Ieviešanas zinātne |
| Saime | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Izcelsmes gads≠ | 2004 | 1999 |
| Autors≠ | Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) | Glasgow, R. E., Vogt, T. M., and colleagues |
| Tips | Framework | Framework |
| Pirmavots≠ | Canadian Institutes of Health Research. (2004). Knowledge Translation Strategy 2004-2009. CIHR, Ottawa. link ↗ | Glasgow, R. E., Vogt, T. M., & Boles, S. M. (1999). Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: The RE-AIM framework. American Journal of Public Health, 89(9), 1322-1327. DOI ↗ |
| Citi nosaukumi | KT, evidence-to-practice, research-to-practice | RE-AIM, REAIM, Glasgow framework |
| Saistītās | 5 | 5 |
| Kopsavilkums≠ | Knowledge Translation (KT) is the systematic synthesis, dissemination, exchange, and application of research findings to improve health outcomes and healthcare practice. First formalized by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research in 2004, KT recognizes that evidence generation alone does not automatically change clinical or policy behaviour, and structures a purposeful process to bridge the gap between research and practice. | The RE-AIM framework (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance) is a five-dimension evaluation tool designed to assess the public health impact of evidence-based interventions in real-world settings. Developed by Glasgow et al. (1999) to address the gap between efficacy trials (controlled conditions) and effectiveness in practice, RE-AIM provides a comprehensive set of metrics to determine whether an intervention is 'worth it' from both scientific and practical perspectives. It has become the standard framework for evaluating implementation success across health domains. |
| ScholarGateDatu kopa ↗ |
|
|