Table 1 Elements of Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Systems (PARIHS) framework
From: Knowledge implementation in health care management: a qualitative study
Elements | sub elements | ||
|---|---|---|---|
Low | High | ||
Evidence | Research | • Poorly conceived, designed, and/or executed research • Seen as only type of evidence • Not valued as evidence • Seen as certain | • Well-conceived, deigned, and executed research, appropriate to the research question • Seen as one part of a decision • Valued as evidence • Lack of certain acknowledged • Judged as relevant • Importance weighted • Conclusion drown |
Clinical experience | • Anecdotal, with critical reflection and judgment • Lack of consensus within similar groups • Not valued as evidence • Seen as only type of evidence | • Clinical experience and expertise reflected upon, tested by individuals and groups • Consensus within similar groups • Valued as evidence • Seen as only type of evidence • Judged as relevant • Importance weighted • Conclusion drown | |
Patient experience | • Not valued as evidence • Seen as only type of evidence • Patient not involved | • Valued as evidence • Multiple biographic used • Partnership with healthcare professionals • Seen as only type of evidence • Judged as relevant • Importance weighted • Conclusion drown | |
Local data/ information | • Not valued as evidence • Lack of systematic methods for collection and analysis • Not reflected upon • Not Conclusion drown | • Valued as evidence • Collected and analysis systematically rigorously • Evaluated and reflected upon • Conclusion drown | |
Context | Culture | • Unclear valued and beliefs • Low regard for individuals • Task driven organization • Lake of consistency • Resources not allocated • Well integrated with strategic goals | • Abel to define cultures in terms of prevailing values / beliefs • Values individual staff and clients • Promotes learning organization • Consistency of individuals role/experience to value relationship with others teamwork • Power and authority • Rewards /recognition • Resources-human, financial, equipment, allocated • Initiative fits with strategic goals and is a key practice/patient issue |
Leadership | • Traditional, command, and control leadership • Lack of role clarity • Lack of teamwork • Poor organizational structures • Autocratic decision-making processes • Didactic approaches to learning/teaching/managing | • Transformational leadership  • Role clarity • Effective teamwork • Effective organizational structures • Democratic-inclusive decision-making processes • Enabling/empowering approach to teaching/learning/managing | |
Evaluation | • Absence of any form of feedback • Narrow use of performance information sources • Evaluations rely on single rather than multiple methods | • Feedback on Individual Team System performance • Use of multiple sources of information on performance • Use of multiple methods Clinical Performance Economic Experience evaluations | |
Facilitation | Purpose | Task Doing for others  • Episodic contact  • Practical/technical help  • Didactic, traditional approach to teaching  • External agents  • Low intensity—extensive coverage | Holistic Role Enabling others • Sustained partnership • Developmental • Adult learning approach to teaching • Internal/external agents • High intensity—limited coverage |
Skills and attributes | Task/doing for others  • Project management skills  • Technical skills  • Marketing skills  • Subject/technical/clinical credibility | Holistic/enabling others  • Cocounseling  • Critical reflection  • Giving meaning  • Flexibility of role  • Realness/authenticity | |