ScholarGate
助手

方法对比

并排查看您选择的方法;存在差异的行会高亮显示。

实施结果分类×RE-AIM框架×
领域实施科学实施科学
方法族Process / pipelineProcess / pipeline
起源年份20111999
提出者Proctor, E. K., Silmere, H., Raghavan, R., et al.Glasgow, R. E., Vogt, T. M., and colleagues
类型TaxonomyFramework
开创性文献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. 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 ↗
别名implementation outcomes, Proctor framework, implementation success measuresRE-AIM, REAIM, Glasgow framework
相关55
摘要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.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.
ScholarGate数据集
  1. v1
  2. 3 来源
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 3 来源
  3. PUBLISHED

前往搜索 下载幻灯片

ScholarGate方法对比: Implementation Outcome Taxonomy · RE-AIM Framework. 于 2026-06-17 检索自 https://scholargate.app/zh/compare