Tuyển tập báo cáo các nghiên cứu khoa học quốc tế ngành y học dành cho các bạn tham khảo đề tài: A critical synthesis of literature on the promoting action on research implementation in health services (PARIHS) framework | Helfrich et al. Implementation Science 2010 5 82 http content 5 1 82 Implementation Science IMPLEMENTATION SCIENCE SYSTEMATIC REVIEW Open Access A critical synthesis of literature on the promoting action on research implementation in health services PARIHS framework r I I I X l h I_IS-. I Tr I r 1 2 I I r I s m fz V r I f V3 I_I I I I I I I_I X z t c r v 4 5 I r c X z t z t f f 6 A II I C xhn i7M i D I -f- - I- I T- 8 Christian D Helfrich Laura J Damschroder Hildi J Hagedorn Ginger S Daggett Anju sanay Mona Ritchie Teresa Damush6 9 Marylou Guihan10 Philip M Ullrich11 Cheryl B Stetler12 13 Abstract Background The Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services framework or PARIHS is a conceptual framework that posits key interacting elements that influence successful implementation of evidencebased practices. It has been widely cited and used as the basis for empirical work however there has not yet been a literature review to examine how the framework has been used in implementation projects and research. The purpose of the present article was to critically review and synthesize the literature on PARIHS to understand how it has been used and operationalized and to highlight its strengths and limitations. Methods We conducted a qualitative critical synthesis of peer-reviewed PARIHS literature published through March 2009. We synthesized findings through a three-step process using semi-structured data abstraction tools and group consensus. Results Twenty-four articles met our inclusion criteria six core concept articles from original PARIHS authors and eighteen empirical articles ranging from case reports to quantitative studies. Empirical articles generally used PARIHS as an organizing framework for analyses. No studies used PARIHS prospectively to design implementation strategies and there was generally a lack of detail about how variables were measured or mapped or how conclusions were derived. Several studies used .
