Center for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105, USA.
Dow Division of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA.
Implement Sci. 2017 Jul 28;12(1):97. doi: 10.1186/s13012-017-0628-2.
A recent review of frameworks used in dissemination and implementation (D&I) science described 61 judged to be related either to dissemination, implementation, or both. The current use of these frameworks and their contributions to D&I science more broadly has yet to be reviewed. For these reasons, our objective was to determine the role of these frameworks in the development of D&I science.
We used the Web of Science™ Core Collection and Google Scholar™ to conduct a citation network analysis for the key frameworks described in a recent systematic review of D&I frameworks (Am J Prev Med 43(3):337-350, 2012). From January to August 2016, we collected framework data including title, reference, publication year, and citations per year and conducted descriptive and main path network analyses to identify those most important in holding the current citation network for D&I frameworks together.
The source article contained 119 cited references, with 50 published articles and 11 documents identified as a primary framework reference. The average citations per year for the 61 frameworks reviewed ranged from 0.7 to 103.3 among articles published from 1985 to 2012. Citation rates from all frameworks are reported with citation network analyses for the framework review article and ten highly cited framework seed articles. The main path for the D&I framework citation network is presented.
We examined citation rates and the main paths through the citation network to delineate the current landscape of D&I framework research, and opportunities for advancing framework development and use. Dissemination and implementation researchers and practitioners may consider frequency of framework citation and our network findings when planning implementation efforts to build upon this foundation and promote systematic advances in D&I science.
最近对传播和实施（D&I）科学中使用的框架进行了综述，其中描述了 61 个被认为与传播、实施或两者都相关的框架。目前，这些框架的使用情况及其对更广泛的 D&I 科学的贡献尚未得到审查。基于这些原因，我们的目标是确定这些框架在 D&I 科学发展中的作用。
我们使用 Web of ScienceTM 核心合集和 Google ScholarTM 对最近对 D&I 框架进行的系统综述（Am J Prev Med 43(3):337-350, 2012）中描述的关键框架进行了引文网络分析。从 2016 年 1 月到 8 月，我们收集了框架数据，包括标题、参考文献、出版年份和每年的引文数，并进行了描述性和主要路径网络分析，以确定对当前 D&I 框架引文网络具有重要意义的框架。
来源文章包含 119 条被引参考文献，其中 50 篇文章和 11 篇文献被确定为主要框架参考文献。从 1985 年到 2012 年出版的 61 个框架的年平均引文数在 0.7 到 103.3 之间。报告了所有框架的引文率，并对框架综述文章和十个高被引框架种子文章进行了引文网络分析。呈现了 D&I 框架引文网络的主要路径。
我们检查了引文率和引文网络中的主要路径，以描绘 D&I 框架研究的当前格局，并为框架的开发和使用提供机会。传播和实施研究人员和从业者在计划实施工作时，可能会考虑框架的引用频率和我们的网络发现，以在这一基础上开展工作，并促进 D&I 科学的系统进步。
