Compară metode
Examinează metodele selectate una lângă alta; rândurile care diferă sunt evidențiate.
| Evaluarea fidelității în implementare× | Cadrul RE-AIM× | |
|---|---|---|
| Domeniu | Știința implementării | Știința implementării |
| Familie | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Anul apariției≠ | 2004 | 1999 |
| Autorul original≠ | National Institutes of Health Behavior Change Consortium; Bellg et al. | Glasgow, R. E., Vogt, T. M., and colleagues |
| Tip≠ | Method | Framework |
| Sursa seminală≠ | Bellg, A. J., Borrelli, B., Resnick, B., Hecht, J., Minicucci, D. S., Ory, M., ... & Treatment Fidelity Workgroup of the National Institutes of Health Behavior Change Consortium. (2004). Enhancing treatment fidelity in health behavior change studies: Best practices and recommendations from the NIH Behavior Change Consortium. Health Psychology, 23(5), 443-451. DOI ↗ | 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 ↗ |
| Denumiri alternative≠ | fidelity, treatment fidelity, protocol adherence, implementation fidelity | RE-AIM, REAIM, Glasgow framework |
| Înrudite | 5 | 5 |
| Rezumat≠ | Fidelity Assessment is the systematic measurement of the degree to which an intervention is delivered as designed in real-world practice. Formalized by the National Institutes of Health Behavior Change Consortium (Bellg et al. 2004) and expanded in MRC guidance (Moore et al. 2015), fidelity assessment is critical to implementation science because it answers: 'Did we deliver the intervention correctly?' A clinical trial may show a treatment works, but if delivered poorly in practice, benefits disappear. Fidelity assessment prevents misattribution of failure (was the intervention weak, or was implementation poor?) and guides coaching to improve quality. | 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. |
| ScholarGateSet de date ↗ |
|
|