What's New


Integrating a physical activity coaching intervention into diabetes care: a mixed-methods evaluation of a pilot pragmatic trial

We are celebrating! Grab a seat and enjoy this new article with lead author Amy Huebschmann who adds to the story of utilizing an evidence-based physical activity counseling program for those living with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) through her research. In this pilot randomized pragmatic trial Amy and co-authors evaluated feasibility, acceptability, cost, and effectiveness for primary care patients, staff, and leaders. They found that while physical activity changes were less than anticipated; Short Physical Performance Battery outcomes, self-efficacy, and social-environmental support improved significantly. The intervention was found to be highly acceptable and feasible for stakeholders while yielding significant improvements in objective physical function consistent with lower fall risk.

Graph Physical Function by SPPB - Amy H

Read the full article here


Rural Cancer Advisory Board: An Opportunity for Cancer Researchers to Engage Rural Patient Advisors for Input

The Rural Cancer Advisory Board is currently comprised of 9 women from all over the state. While not experts in healthcare, they are experts in rural living with a variety of backgrounds such as ranchers, teachers, and regional health connectors. The primary purpose of the group is to provide insight, feedback, and recommendations to cancer researchers from a rural patient and caregiver perspective. Our research advisors are volunteers. They have varying levels of experience with cancer; some personally, some as family caregivers, and some as community support.

The group meets every other month in a virtual format. Please contact Adreanne Brungardt for more information, including if you would like to present your research study for input from these patient advisors –  Adreanne.brungardt@cuanschutz.edu


Targeting Rural Health Disparities in Lung Cancer Screening by Co-Creating a Decision Aid

Presentation by Dr. Huebschmann on ways the Colorado Implementation Science Center for Cancer Control and Prevention (Colorado ISC3) is leveraging D&I methods to address health equity.

View slide deck HERE


PCORI’s Board of Governors adopted five National Priorities for Health to guide PCORI funding of patient- centered comparative clinical effectiveness research (CER). This process included a 60-day public comment period and several meetings and events that generated vital feedback reflected in the adopted priorities:


Iterative RE-AIM Framework Video

Individual (RE) and Multi-level Setting (AIM) factors- community, organization, and staff

Please take a moment to view Iterative RE-AIM Framework to Inform Adaptations, a fun brief informational video from Cathy Battaglia and friends on Iterative RE-AIM. Iterative RE-AIM is a transitional research based approach from research to practice, policy, and real world applications. This video details how to carry out an Iterative RE-AIM assessment with your team.


New Resource:

Costing Annotated Bibliography of Economic Analysis Resources Relevant for Implementation Science

This tool was created by UC San Diego DISC and the ACCORDS D&I Program to compile resources, tools, and studies about cost/cost-effectiveness research in implementation science


Recommended reads

Krieger, N. (2020). Measures of racism, sexism, heterosexism, and gender binarism for health equity research: From structural injustice to embodied harm—An ecosocial analysis. Annual Review of Public Health, 41, 37-62. Read the Article

  1. Neta, G., Clyne, M., & Chambers, D. A. (2020). Dissemination and Implementation Research at the National Cancer Institute: A Review of Funded Studies (2006-2019) and Opportunities to Advance the Field. Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention Biomarkers. Read the Article
  2. Neta, G. (2020). Ensuring the Value of Cancer Research: Opportunities in Implementation Science. Trends in Cancer. Read the Article
  3. Jalali, M. S., Rahmandad, H., Bullock, S. L., Lee-Kwan, S. H., Gittelsohn, J., & Ammerman, A. (2019). Dynamics of intervention adoption, implementation, and maintenance inside organizations: The case of an obesity prevention initiative. Social Science & Medicine, 224, 67-76. Read the Article
  4. Flottorp, S., Oxman, A., Krause, J., Musila, N., Wensing, M., Godycki-Cwirko, M., . . . Eccles, M. (2013). A checklist for identifying determinants of practice: A systematic review and synthesis of frameworks and taxonomies of factors that prevent or enable improvements in healthcare professional practice. 8(1), 35. Read the Article
  5. Crable, E., Biancarelli, D., Walkey, A., Allen, C., Proctor, E., & Drainoni, M. (2018). Standardizing an approach to the evaluation of implementation science proposals. Implementation Science : IS, 13(1), 71. Read the Article
  6. Chambers, D. A. (2020). Considering the intersection between implementation science and COVID-19. Implementation Research and Practice. doi.org/10.1177/0020764020925994 Read the Article
  7. Kislov, R., Pope, C., Martin, G., & Wilson, P. (2019). Harnessing the power of theorising in implementation science.  IS, 14(1), 1-8. Read the Article​​
  8. Vinson, C., Clyne, M., Cardoza, N., & Emmons, K. (2019). Building capacity: A cross-sectional evaluation of the US Training Institute for Dissemination and Implementation Research in Health. Implementati​on Science : IS, 14(1), 97.  Read the Article​​
  9. Kemp, C., Wagenaar, B. , & Haroz, E. (2019). Expanding Hybrid Studies for Implementation Research: Intervention, Implementation Strategy, and Context. Frontiers in Public Health, 7, 325. Read the Article​​

Skivington K, Matthews L, Simpson S A, Craig P, Baird J, Blazeby J M et al . A new framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions: update of Medical Research Council guidance BMJ 2021; 374 :n2061 doi:10.1136/bmj.n2061

Read the Article