RE-AIM 2.0/Contextually Expanded RE-AIM
D and/or I:
The focus on dissemination and/or implementation activities. D-only focuses on an active approach of spreading evidence-based interventions to target audience via determined channels using planned strategies. D=I, D>I, and I>D means there is some focus on both dissemination and implementation. I-only focuses on process of putting to use or integrating evidence-based interventions within a setting.
D=I Socio-Ecological Levels:
The level of the framework at which the model operates. Individual includes personal characteristics; Organization includes hospitals, service organizations, and factories; Community includes local government and neighborhoods; System includes hospital systems and government; Policy includes changes in policy.
- Individual
- Organization
- Community
Number of Times Cited:
The # of times the original publication for the model was cited as indicated by Google Scholar since 2016.
131 Field of Origin:
The field of study in which the model originated.
Public Health Practitioner/Researcher:
Whether the model is for the use of practitioners and/or researchers.
Researcher and Practioner Rating:
These are ratings given by users of the site.
Constructs:
Name of the construct developed by classifying/aligning the elements abstracted from models.
Assessment Instruments:
- AHRQ Digital Health Equity Framework
- CFIR Interview Guide (Lam)
- CFIR Interview Guide (Zhao)
- CFIR Interview Guide Webtool
- Clinical Sustainability Assessment Tool (CSAT)
- Context Matters Reporting Template
- Cost of Implementing New Strategies (COINS)
- Diagnosis Related Group (DRG) Policy Survey
- Evidence Based Practice Attitude Scale (EBPAS)
- FRAME-IS Adaptation Tracking Instrument
- Glisson's Organizational Social Context (OSC)
- Goodman's Level of Institutionalization
- Hall's Levels of Use Scale
- Implementation Climate Scale (ICS)
- Implementation Leadership Scale (ILS)
- Implementation Strategy Usability Scale
- Intervention Scalability Assessment Tool (ISAT)
- Iterative, Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (iPRISM) Webtool
- Local Wellness Policy Implementation Checklist
- Longitudinal Implementation Strategy Tracking System (LISTS)
- Normalization Process Theory Interview Guide
- Normalization Process Theory Questionnaire (NoMAD)
- PRISM Contextual Survey Instrument (PCSI)
- PRISM Interview Guide
- Partnership/Synergy Assessment Tool
- Policy Coalition Evaluation Tool (PCET)
- Program Sustainability Assessment Tool (PSAT)
- Program Sustainability Index
- RAPICE Protocol, Activity, and Interview Prompt Guide
- RAPICE Summary Template
- Readiness Thinking Tool - Observation Guide
- Readiness Thinking Tool - Survey
- Readiness for Recovery and Resiliency - Interview Guide
- Rehabilitation Policy Questionnaire
- Short Program Sustainability Assessment Tool (PSAT)
- Stages of Implementation Completion (SIC)
- Van Schaik's Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)
- i-PARiHS Interview Guide
Website:
Website.
http://www.re-aim.org/
Citations:
The original publication(s) of the model.
Glasgow RE, Harden SM, Gaglio B, Rabin B, Smith ML, Porter GC, Ory MG, Estabrooks PA. RE-AIM Planning and Evaluation Framework: Adapting to New Science and Practice With a 20-Year Review. Front Public Health. 2019 Mar 29;7:64. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2019.00064. PMID: 30984733; PMCID: PMC6450067. Examples:
Citations of studies that have used the model as an outline for their study.
Aittasalo M, Miilunpalo S, StÃ¥hl T, Kukkonen-Harjula K. From innovation to practice: initiation, implementation and evaluation of a physician-based physical activity promotion programme in Finland. Health Promot Int 2007;22(1):19.Car, J., Sheikh, A., Wicks, P. et al. Beyond the hype of big data and artificial intelligence: building foundations for knowledge and wisdom. BMC Med 17, 143 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-019-1382-x”
De Meij JSB, Chinapaw MJM, Kremers SPJ, Jurg ME, Van Mechelen W. Promoting physical activity in children: the stepwise development of the primary school-based JUMP-in intervention applying the RE-AIM evaluation framework. Brit J Sports Med 2010;44(12):879-87.
Glasgow RE, Nelson CC, Strycker LA, King DK. Using RE-AIM metrics to evaluate diabetes self-management support interventions. Am J Prev Med 2006;30(1):67-73.
Kwan BM, McGinnes HL, Ory MG, Estabrooks PA, Waxmonsky JA, Glasgow RE. RE-AIM in the Real World: Use of the RE-AIM Framework for Program Planning and Evaluation in Clinical and Community Settings. Front Public Health. 2019 Nov 22;7:345. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2019.00345
Ory MG, Lee S, Towne SD Jr, Flores S, Gabriel O, Smith ML. Implementing a Diabetes Education Program to Reduce Health Disparities in South Texas: Application of the RE-AIM Framework for Planning and Evaluation. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Aug 30;17(17):6312. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17176312.
Paniagua-Avila A, Fort MP, Glasgow RE, Gulayin P, Hernández-Galdamez D, Mansilla K, Palacios E, Peralta AL, Roche D, Rubinstein A, He J, Ramirez-Zea M, Irazola V. Evaluating a multicomponent program to improve hypertension control in Guatemala: study protocol for an effectiveness-implementation cluster randomized trial. Trials. 2020 Jun 9;21(1):509. doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-04345-8. PMID: 32517806; PMCID: PMC7281695.
Pawlowski CS, Schmidt T, Nielsen JV, Troelsen J, Schipperijn J. Will the children use it?-A RE-AIM evaluation of a local public open space intervention involving children from a deprived neighbourhood. Eval Program Plann. 2019 Dec;77:101706. doi: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2019.101706.
Van Acker R, De Bourdeaudhuij I, De Cocker K, Klesges L, Cardon G. The impact of disseminating the whole-community project ‚Äò10,000 Steps’: a RE-AIM analysis. BMC Publ Health 2011;11(1):3.
There are no reviews yet. Be the first one to write one.