Advertisement
Table 3 Items which did not achieve consensus
| Section | Standard | Consensus (% agreement with scores 7, 8 or 9) |
|---|---|---|
| Title and abstract | The title (or abstract if word count of title precludes) should include a description of the methodology (e.g. phase IV implementation study, cluster randomised implementation trial, interrupted time series, before and after, stepped wedge study). | 79% |
| Introduction | Include a description of the wider health care/policy/commercial context. | 58% |
| Describe any pilot implementation work and the conclusions from that work. | 63% | |
| Methods (the new service) | What is the relation of components of the intervention to the rationale for the new service design and/or theory underpinning implementation discussed above? | 30% |
| Define role of the researchers in design and implementation. | 79% | |
| Methods (population) | If applicable, describe any consent required (which should be to the new service and not to research). | 53% |
| Describe recruitment of any sub-groups recruited for additional research tasks (e.g. questionnaire completion, physiological measures, detailed record analysis). | 47% | |
| Results (population) | Report details of any subgroups recruited to specific research tasks (e.g. questionnaire completion, physiological testing) as opposed to the clinical service. Compare characteristics of any sub-groups to the whole eligible population. | 74% |
| Discussion (population) | Include a structured abstract (for example including summary of findings, strengths and limitations, comparison with other studies, conclusions and implications). | 58% |
| Reflect on the processes of implementing the service, barriers or facilitators and lessons learned. | 79% | |
| How did the setting enable or hinder the implementation of the new service? | 79% | |
| How was the new service was implemented highlighting (if relevant) variations between sites and over time and the impact on treatment outcomes and unintended consequences? | 74% |
