Gå til innholdScholarGate
BibliotekMitt bibliotekPultenReview StudioAssistent
Logg inn
NPT/Bevis
Metodebevisregister

NPT

Normalization Process Theory (NPT) is a framework developed by May, Murray, and colleagues (2009) to explain how new practices, technologies, and innovations become embedded and sustained in everyday organizational and clinical work. Rather than viewing implementation as a one-time adoption event, NPT conceptualizes implementation as a process of normalization—the gradual transition from 'new and unusual' to 'normal, routine work integrated into standard processes.' NPT identifies four normalization mechanisms: Coherence (shared understanding of the intervention's purpose and value), Cognitive Participation (staff engagement and involvement in learning and using the intervention), Collective Action (the work required to implement, including workflow changes and resource allocation), and Reflexive Monitoring (ongoing reflection on impacts, benefits, and needed adaptations). NPT has become influential in implementation science research, particularly in health technology implementation and complex intervention studies, and provides a theoretical lens for understanding why some innovations become normalized while others are abandoned.

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Kilderegister

Siteringer kopiert ordrett fra metodens kilderegister. Ingen påstandsnivåverifisering er underforstått fra dem.

Normalization Process Theory
Taksonomisk metoderegister · process-pipeline / implementation-science
  • Murray, E., Treweek, S., Pope, C., MacFarlane, A., Ballini, L., Dowrick, C., ... & May, C. R. (2010). Normalizing adoption of new health care innovations: A systematic review of empirical studies. American Journal of Health Promotion, 24(4), e5–e15. · URL
  • May, C. R., Murray, E., Mair, F. S., & Finch, T. (2009). Development of a theory of implementation and integration of digital innovations in health and social care: The Normalization Process Theory. Inform Prim Care, 17(2), 89–99. · DOI 10.1186/1748-5908-4-29
Åpne full metode

Kuraterte påstander

Påstander lagret i bevishovedboken, hver med sin egen vurdering.

Ingen kuraterte påstander ennå

Denne visningen finner ikke opp en påstandsvurdering når hovedboken ikke har noen.

Relaterte metoder

Generert fra metodegrafen og vist som maskinforslåtte relasjoner – ingen bevispåstand er underforstått.

Same method familyEBPAS-36machine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyICSmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Taxonomic bucketKTAmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyORICmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familySoCmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.

Bevisstatus

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Bibliographic sources are present. Claim-level evidence review has not been performed.

Kilder

2 registrerte siteringer, kopiert fra metodens kilderegister.

Handlinger

Åpne metodeside
ScholarGate

Et innholdsfokusert oppslagsbibliotek for forskningsmetoder — hva hver metode er, hvordan den fungerer, og hvor den kommer fra.

Åpne data (CC-BY)

Oppdag

  • Bibliotek
  • Søk i metoder…
  • Bla etter fagfelt
  • Fagfelt
  • Reise
  • Sammenlign
  • Hvilken metode?

Referanse

  • Fagområder
  • Atlas
  • Ordliste
  • Metodikk
  • Filosofi

Arbeidsområde

  • Mitt bibliotek
  • Pulten
  • Chat

Selskap

  • Om
  • Priser
  • Kontakt
  • Foreslå en metode

Oppføringene er sammenstilt fra publiserte kilder til referansebruk. Å kontrollere at informasjonen er korrekt og egnet for ditt eget bruk, er fremdeles ditt eget ansvar.

© 2026 ScholarGate · Et oppslagsbibliotek for forskningsmetoder
  • Personvern
  • Informasjonskapsler
  • Vilkår
  • Slett konto