So sánh phương pháp

	Mở rộng quy mô can thiệp y tế	Hệ thống phân loại Kết quả Thực hiện
Lĩnh vực	Khoa học triển khai	Khoa học triển khai
Họ	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Năm ra đời	2007	2011
Người khởi xướng	Simmons, R., Fajans, P., Ghiron, L. (World Health Organization)	Proctor, E. K., Silmere, H., Raghavan, R., et al.
Loại	Framework	Taxonomy
Công trình gốc	Simmons, R., Fajans, P., & Ghiron, L. (Eds.). (2007). Scaling Up Health Service Delivery: From Pilot Innovations to Policies and Programmes. World Health Organization, Geneva.	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.
Tên gọi khác	scaling up, expansion, scale, dissemination	implementation outcomes, Proctor framework, implementation success measures
Liên quan	5	5
Tóm tắt	Scaling Up is the deliberate expansion of successful health interventions from pilot sites to entire health systems, regions, or countries. Formalized by the World Health Organization (WHO) and Simmons et al. (2007), scaling up is distinct from simple dissemination; it requires systematic planning, financial modeling, capacity building, and policy alignment to ensure interventions work at scale. A pilot that succeeds brilliantly with champion leadership, dedicated funding, and motivated staff may fail when scaled to routine settings with limited resources. Scaling Up frameworks help practitioners anticipate and overcome these challenges.	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.