« Back to Assessment Instruments
Qualitative/Quantitative:
Type of Instrument:
Number of Items:
23Subscale Information:
No SubscalesLanguage Availability:
Brief Description:
The Normalizing Process Theory Questionnaire (NoMAD) is an instrument used to assess, monitor or measure factors likely to affect normalization from the perspective of implementation participants.Website:
Citing Literature - Development/Original:
Rapley, T., Girling, M., Mair, F. S., Murray, E., Treweek, S., McColl, E., Steen, I. N., May, C. R., & Finch, T. L. (2018). Improving the normalization of complex interventions: part 1 - development of the NoMAD instrument for assessing implementation work based on normalization process theory (NPT). BMC medical research methodology, 18(1), 133. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0590-y. PMID: 30442093 PMCID: PMC6238361.
Finch, T. L., Girling, M., May, C. R., Mair, F. S., Murray, E., Treweek, S., McColl, E., Steen, I. N., Cook, C., Vernazza, C. R., Mackintosh, N., Sharma, S., Barbery, G., Steele, J., & Rapley, T. (2018). Improving the normalization of complex interventions: part 2 - validation of the NoMAD instrument for assessing implementation work based on normalization process theory (NPT). BMC medical research methodology, 18(1), 135. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0591-x. PMID: 30442094 PMCID: PMC6238372.
Finch TL, Rapley T, Girling M, Mair FS, Murray E, Treweek S, et al. Improving the normalization of complex interventions: measure development based on normalization process theory (NoMAD): study protocol. Implement Sci. 2013;8(1):43. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-8-43.Citing Literature - Empirical Use/Application:
Holdsworth, L. M., Stedman, M., Gustafsson, E. S., Han, J., Asch, S. M., Harbert, G., Lorenz, K. A., Lupu, D. E., Malcolm, E., Moss, A. H., Nicklas, A., & Kurella Tamura, M. (2023). "Diving in the deep-end and swimming": a mixed methods study using normalization process theory to evaluate a learning collaborative approach for the implementation of palliative care practices in hemodialysis centers. BMC health services research, 23(1), 1384. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-023-10360-7. PMID: 38082293 PMCID: PMC10712060.Version:
Not Found
Normalization Process Theory Questionnaire (NoMAD)
Qualitative/Quantitative:
The assessment instrument uses quantitative and/or qualitative data
The assessment instrument uses quantitative and/or qualitative data
- Quantitative
Type of Instrument:
The type of the assessment instrument
The type of the assessment instrument
- Survey
Number of Items:
Number of items in the assessment instrument
23
Number of items in the assessment instrument
Subscale Information:
Names of each of the subscales and the number of items for each of the subscales
No Subscales
Names of each of the subscales and the number of items for each of the subscales
Language Availability:
Language(s) in which the assessment instrument is available
Language(s) in which the assessment instrument is available
- English
- Swedish
Brief Description:
Brief summary description of assessment instrument
The Normalizing Process Theory Questionnaire (NoMAD) is an instrument used to assess, monitor or measure factors likely to affect normalization from the perspective of implementation participants.
Brief summary description of assessment instrument
Website:
Website providing access to and/or describing the assessment instrument
Website providing access to and/or describing the assessment instrument
Instrument and/or related documentation:
Citing Literature - Development/Original:
Reference for publication describing the development of the assessment instrument
Rapley, T., Girling, M., Mair, F. S., Murray, E., Treweek, S., McColl, E., Steen, I. N., May, C. R., & Finch, T. L. (2018). Improving the normalization of complex interventions: part 1 - development of the NoMAD instrument for assessing implementation work based on normalization process theory (NPT). BMC medical research methodology, 18(1), 133. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0590-y. PMID: 30442093 PMCID: PMC6238361.
Reference for publication describing the development of the assessment instrument
Finch, T. L., Girling, M., May, C. R., Mair, F. S., Murray, E., Treweek, S., McColl, E., Steen, I. N., Cook, C., Vernazza, C. R., Mackintosh, N., Sharma, S., Barbery, G., Steele, J., & Rapley, T. (2018). Improving the normalization of complex interventions: part 2 - validation of the NoMAD instrument for assessing implementation work based on normalization process theory (NPT). BMC medical research methodology, 18(1), 135. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0591-x. PMID: 30442094 PMCID: PMC6238372.
Finch TL, Rapley T, Girling M, Mair FS, Murray E, Treweek S, et al. Improving the normalization of complex interventions: measure development based on normalization process theory (NoMAD): study protocol. Implement Sci. 2013;8(1):43. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-8-43.
Citing Literature - Empirical Use/Application:
Reference for publications on the application of the assessment instrument
Holdsworth, L. M., Stedman, M., Gustafsson, E. S., Han, J., Asch, S. M., Harbert, G., Lorenz, K. A., Lupu, D. E., Malcolm, E., Moss, A. H., Nicklas, A., & Kurella Tamura, M. (2023). "Diving in the deep-end and swimming": a mixed methods study using normalization process theory to evaluate a learning collaborative approach for the implementation of palliative care practices in hemodialysis centers. BMC health services research, 23(1), 1384. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-023-10360-7. PMID: 38082293 PMCID: PMC10712060.
Reference for publications on the application of the assessment instrument
Version:
Number/name of the most recent version of the assessment instrument
Not Found
Number/name of the most recent version of the assessment instrument
Related Instruments:
Not FoundImplementation Science Considerations
- Active Implementation Framework
- Adherence Optimization Framework
- Advancing health disparities research within the health care system
- Availability, Responsiveness & Continuity (ARC): An Organizational & Community Intervention Model
- Behaviour Change Wheel
- Blueprint for Dissemination
- Caledonian Practice Development Model
- Canadian Institutes of Health Research Knowledge Translation within the Research Cycle Model or Knowledge Action Model
- Choosing Wisely Deimplementation Framework
- Collaborative Model for Knowledge Translation Between Research and Practice Settings
- Community Based Participatory Research (CBPR)
- Conceptual Framework For The Comparative Analysis of Policy Change
- Conceptual Framework for Research Knowledge Transfer and Utilization
- Conceptual Model of Implementation Research
- Conceptual Model of Knowledge Utilization
- Conceptualizing Dissemination Research and Activity: Canadian Heart Health Initiative
- Conduct and Utilization of Research in Nursing (CURN)
- Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research
- Convergent Diffusion and Social Marketing Approach for Dissemination
- Coordinated Implementation Model
- Critical Realism & the Arts Research Utilization Model (CRARIUM)
- Davis' Pathman-PRECEED Model
- Dissemination and Implementation Framework for an Early Childhood Obesity Prevention Program
- Dissemination of Evidence-based Interventions to Prevent Obesity
- Dynamic Sustainability Framework
- EMTReK - Evidence-based Model for the Transfer and Exchange of Research Knowledge
- EQ-DI Framework
- Evidence Integration Triangle
- Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) model (Conceptual Model of Evidence-based Practice Implementation in Public Service Sectors)
- Facilitating Adoption of Best Practices (FAB) Model
- Framework for Analyzing Adoption of Complex Health Innovations
- Framework for Dissemination of Evidence-Based Policy
- Framework for Enhancing the Value of Research for Dissemination and Implementation
- Framework for Spread
- Framework for the Dissemination & Utilization of Research for Health-Care Policy & Practice
- Framework for the Transfer of Patient Safety Research into Practice
- Framework of Dissemination in Health Services Intervention Research
- General theory of implementation
- Generic Implementation Framework
- Greenhalgh Diffusion of Innovations in Service Organizations
- Health Equity Implementation Framework
- Health Promotion Research Center Framework
- Implementation Effectiveness Model
- Interacting Elements of Integrating Science, Policy, and Practice
- Interactive Systems Framework
- Intervention Mapping
- Iowa Model of Evidence-Based Practice
- Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice Model and Guidelines
- Kingdon's Multiple-Streams Framework
- Knowledge Exchange Framework
- Knowledge Transfer and Exchange
- Model for Predictors of Adoption
- Organizational Theory of Innovation Implementation
- OutPatient Treatment in Ontario Services (OPTIONS) Model
- Pathways to Evidence Informed Policy
- Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM)
- Pragmatic-Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary 2
- Precede-Proceed Model
- Proctor's Implementation Outcomes
- Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS)
- Pronovost's 4E's Process Theory
- Push-Pull Capacity Model
- RAND Model of Persuasive Communication and Diffusion of Medical Innovation
- RE-AIM 1.0 Framework
- RE-AIM 2.0/Contextually Expanded RE-AIM
- Real-World Dissemination
- Replicating Effective Programs Framework
- Six-Step Framework for International Physical Activity Dissemination
- Theoretical Domains Framework
- Transcreation Framework for Community-engaged Behavioral Interventions to Reduce Health Disparities
- Weiner organizational readiness
- conNECT Framework
- Sustainment
- Use evaluative and iterative strategies
Constructs Assessed:
Constructs assessed by the assessment instrument (linked to constructs included in the D&I models webtool)
Theories, Models, Frameworks Relevant:
Implementation Outcomes:
The relevance of the assessment instrument to various implementation outcomes
Implementation Strategies:
The implementation strategy/ies evaluated by the assessment instrument
Phase of Implementation Process:
Not Found
Phase of implementation process when the assessment instrument can be used
Intended Focus
- Individual (Patient, Community Member)
- Researcher/Evaluator
- Administrator
- Clinical Outpatient
- Clinical Inpatient
- Residential Care
- Community Organization
- Public Health Agency
- School
- Workplace
Levels of Data Collection:
The level(s) from which the assessment instrument collects data
Intended Priority Population:
Intended priority population from whom data are collected using the assessment instrument
Intended Priority Setting:
Intended priority setting in which the assessment instrument is used
Policy:
Not Found
Assessment instrument is relevant to policy
Equity Focus:
Not Found
Psychometric Properties
- Unspecified Validity
Scoring:
No
The assessment instrument produces a composite score
Norms:
Not Found
Measures of central tendency and distribution for the total score are based on small, medium, large sample size
Responsiveness:
Yes
The ability of the assessment instrument to detect change over time (i.e., sensitivity to change or intervention effects).
Validity:
The extent to which an instrument measures what it is intended to measure accurately.
Reliability:
Not Found
The extent to which results are consistent results over time, across raters, across settings, or across items intended to measure the same thing.
Factor Analysis:
Not Found
A statistical method that uses the correlation between observed variables to identify common factors.
Pragmatic Properties
- Guidance to Administer
- Medium: Asyncronous collection of data
- Adaptive Instrument
Time to Administer:
Not Found
The amount of time required to complete the assessment instrument
Secondary Data:
Not FoundCost:
Free
Cost associated with access to assessment instrument (Some insturments might require login.)
Literacy:
Yes
Readability of the items reported on.
Interpretation:
No
Expertise needed for interpretation of data is reported.
Training:
No
Expertise needed to use the assessment instrument is reported
Resources Required to Administer:
None/Low
Resources needed to administer the assessment instrument (FTE for data collector, equipment, etc.)
User Guidance:
Guides are provided to support administration of assessment instrument/data collection, and/or analysis of data from the assessment instrument, and/or interpretation of data, and/or action/decision on how to use data
Obtrusiveness:
Degree of intrusion the participants will experience because of the data collection when using the assessment instrument (e.g., assessment instruments that rely on use of secondary data or automated data will be less obtrusive)
Interactivity:
Data collection and/or result generation involves interactive components.
Comments
There are no reviews yet. Be the first one to write one.