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
-
The updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research based on user feedback
by: Laura J. Damschroder, et al.
Published: (2022-10-01) -
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) -
Sustainment of diverse evidence-informed practices disseminated in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA): initial development and piloting of a pragmatic survey tool
by: Caitlin M. Reardon, et al.
Published: (2023-01-01) -
Conceptualizing outcomes for use with the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR): the CFIR Outcomes Addendum
by: Laura J. Damschroder, et al.
Published: (2022-01-01) -
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)