TY - JOUR
T1 - Critical actions for embedding research evidence into practice
T2 - how to get the most out of your implementation scientist
AU - Mazariego, Carolyn
AU - Gul, Hossai
AU - Liang, Shuang
AU - Kelly-Hanku, Angela
AU - Brady, Bernadette
AU - Allida, Sabine
AU - Baffsky, Rachel
AU - McErlean, Gemma
AU - Crespo, Carmen
AU - Hodgins, Michael
AU - Christie, Lauren
AU - Peiris, David
AU - Debono, Deborah
AU - MacMillan, Freya
AU - Ferguson, Caleb
AU - Heneka, Nicole
AU - Kennedy, Sarah G.
AU - Liu, Hueiming
AU - Morrow, April
AU - Fontaine, Guillaume
AU - Findlay, Merran
AU - Middleton, Sandy
AU - Lim, David
AU - Straiton, Nicola
AU - Taylor, Natalie
PY - 2025/7/4
Y1 - 2025/7/4
N2 - Implementation science has been gaining traction over the last decade to support health care systems in adopting and sustaining evidence-based interventions, programs, and policies. Given the inherent complexity of implementation research and practice, and their associated methodologies, implementation scientists play a central role in translating research into practice. However, many health care system stakeholders often struggle to understand how best to collaborate with implementation scientists. This commentary discusses the significant benefits of such collaboration, outlining ten critical actions drawn from the collective experience of 25 implementation scientists with over 173 years of combined expertise. This project was conducted under the SPHERE Implementation Science Platform, as part of the Sydney Partnership for Health, Education, Research and Enterprise (SPHERE). The ten recommendations for working with an implementation scientist to optimize implementation efforts include the following: (1) involve implementation scientists early during intervention design, (2) recognize the unique nature and value of implementation science data, (3) integrate implementation assessments into the research plan, (4) foster collaborative partnerships inclusive of implementation science, (5) differentiate between factors affecting implementation and wider constraints, (6) work with implementation scientists to address implementation challenges, (7) prioritize implementation scale and sustainment, (8) embrace that implementation requires continuous learning and adaptation, (9) promote knowledge exchange between implementation science and subject matter experts, and (10) focus on capability- and capacity-building for implementation within the system. By following these recommendations, researchers, clinicians, decision-makers, and implementation scientists can foster impactful collaborations that enhance the translation of research into clinical practice and improve the quality of health care delivery.
AB - Implementation science has been gaining traction over the last decade to support health care systems in adopting and sustaining evidence-based interventions, programs, and policies. Given the inherent complexity of implementation research and practice, and their associated methodologies, implementation scientists play a central role in translating research into practice. However, many health care system stakeholders often struggle to understand how best to collaborate with implementation scientists. This commentary discusses the significant benefits of such collaboration, outlining ten critical actions drawn from the collective experience of 25 implementation scientists with over 173 years of combined expertise. This project was conducted under the SPHERE Implementation Science Platform, as part of the Sydney Partnership for Health, Education, Research and Enterprise (SPHERE). The ten recommendations for working with an implementation scientist to optimize implementation efforts include the following: (1) involve implementation scientists early during intervention design, (2) recognize the unique nature and value of implementation science data, (3) integrate implementation assessments into the research plan, (4) foster collaborative partnerships inclusive of implementation science, (5) differentiate between factors affecting implementation and wider constraints, (6) work with implementation scientists to address implementation challenges, (7) prioritize implementation scale and sustainment, (8) embrace that implementation requires continuous learning and adaptation, (9) promote knowledge exchange between implementation science and subject matter experts, and (10) focus on capability- and capacity-building for implementation within the system. By following these recommendations, researchers, clinicians, decision-makers, and implementation scientists can foster impactful collaborations that enhance the translation of research into clinical practice and improve the quality of health care delivery.
KW - collaboration
KW - guidance
KW - journey
KW - partnership
KW - research–practice gap
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=105010709355&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/XEB.0000000000000518
DO - 10.1097/XEB.0000000000000518
M3 - Comment/debate
AN - SCOPUS:105010709355
SN - 2691-3321
JO - JBI Evidence Implementation
JF - JBI Evidence Implementation
ER -