So sánh phương pháp

	Hệ thống phân loại Kết quả Thực hiện	Dịch thuật tri thức
Lĩnh vực	Khoa học triển khai	Khoa học triển khai
Họ	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Năm ra đời	2011	2004
Người khởi xướng	Proctor, E. K., Silmere, H., Raghavan, R., et al.	Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR)
Loại	Taxonomy	Framework
Công trình gốc	Proctor, E. K., Silmere, H., Raghavan, R., Hovmand, P., Aarons, G. A., Bunger, A., ... & Rojas, D. (2011). Outcomes for implementation research: Conceptual distinctions, measurement challenges, and research agenda. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 38(2), 65-76.	Canadian Institutes of Health Research. (2004). Knowledge Translation Strategy 2004-2009. CIHR, Ottawa.
Tên gọi khác	implementation outcomes, Proctor framework, implementation success measures	KT, evidence-to-practice, research-to-practice
Liên quan	5	5
Tóm tắt	The Implementation Outcome Taxonomy is a framework defining eight measurable dimensions for assessing implementation success: Acceptability, Adoption, Appropriateness, Feasibility, Fidelity, Implementation Cost, Penetration, and Sustainability. Developed by Proctor et al. (2011), it provides a standardized vocabulary and measurement approach to distinguish implementation process outcomes (how well was the intervention delivered?) from clinical outcomes (did patients get better?). This taxonomy is foundational to implementation science because it acknowledges that an evidence-based intervention can be effective (clinical outcome) but poorly implemented (implementation outcome), or feasible to deliver but not adopted by organizations.	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.