Rapid versus traditional qualitative analysis using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR)
Abstract Background Qualitative approaches, alone or in mixed methods, are prominent within implementation science. However, traditional qualitative approaches are resource intensive, which has led to the development of rapid qualitative approaches. Published rapid approaches are often inductive in...
Main Authors: | Andrea L. Nevedal, Caitlin M. Reardon, Marilla A. Opra Widerquist, George L. Jackson, Sarah L. Cutrona, Brandolyn S. White, Laura J. Damschroder |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
BMC
2021-07-01
|
Series: | Implementation Science |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-021-01111-5 |
Similar Items
-
Implementation and sustainment of diverse practices in a large integrated health system: a mixed methods study
by: Andrea L. Nevedal, et al.
Published: (2020-07-01) -
Comparison of rapid vs in-depth qualitative analytic methods from a process evaluation of academic detailing in the Veterans Health Administration
by: Randall C. Gale, et al.
Published: (2019-02-01) -
The CFIR Card Game: a new approach for working with implementation teams to identify challenges and strategies
by: Myra Piat, et al.
Published: (2021-01-01) -
Implementation of a national policy for improving health and social care: a comparative case study using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research
by: Helena Strehlenert, et al.
Published: (2019-10-01) -
Developing measures to assess constructs from the Inner Setting domain of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research
by: Maria E. Fernandez, et al.
Published: (2018-03-01)