Methods for Tool Development and Usability Testing

This tool was developed using rigorous methods:

  • A scoping review1 identified TMF for implementation;
  • Interviews2 with implementation researchers and practitioners explored: (i) barriers and facilitators to identifying and selecting TMF, and (ii) preferences for features (content) and functions of a hypothetical decision support tool;
  • A mapping activity categorised the TMF identified in the scoping review, by aim (framework, model, theory)3, scope (stage of implementation from planning to sustainability)4 and intended level of change (individual, organisational, system/policy);
  • A prototype tool was developed using findings from the scoping review and interviews, and the results from the mapping activity; and,
  • Usability testing with end users evaluated the features, functions and usefulness of the tool.
  1. Strifler L, Cardoso R, McGowan J, Cogo E, Nincic V, Khan PA, Scott A, Ghassemi M, MacDonald H, Lai Y, Treister V, Tricco AC, Straus SE. Scoping review identifies significant number of knowledge translation theories, models, and frameworks with limited use. J Clin Epidemiol 2018;100:92-102.
  2. Strifler L, Barnsley JM, Hillmer M, Straus SE. Identifying and selecting implementation theories, models and frameworks: a qualitative study to inform the development of a decision support tool. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2020;20(1):91.
  3. Nilsen P. Making sense of implementation theories, models and frameworks. Implement Sci 2015;10(1):53.
  4. Graham ID, Logan J, Harrison MB, Straus SE, Tetroe J, Caswell W, Robinson N. Lost in knowledge translation: time for a map? J Contin Educ Heal Prof. 2006;26(1):13-24.