The Cultural Politics of ‘Implementation Science’

Richard Boulton; Jane Sandall; Nick Sevdalis

doi:10.1007/s10912-020-09607-9

The Cultural Politics of ‘Implementation Science’

Richard Boulton^*, Jane Sandall, Nick Sevdalis

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

41 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Despite the growing profile of ‘implementation science’, its status as a field of study remains ambiguous. Implementation science originates in the evidence-based movement and attempts to broaden the scope of evidence-based medicine to improve ‘clinical effectiveness’ and close the ‘implementation gap’. To achieve this agenda, implementation science draws on methodologies from the social sciences to emphasise coherence between qualitative and quantitative approaches. In so doing, we ask if this is at the expense of ignoring the dominating tendencies of the evidence-based movement and consider if some of the methodologies being drawn on should be considered irreconcilable with evidence-based methodologies.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	379-394
Number of pages	16
Journal	Journal of Medical Humanities
Volume	41
Issue number	3
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1007/s10912-020-09607-9
Publication status	Published - 1 Sept 2020

Keywords

Implementation science
Interdisciplinarity
Qualitative vs quantitative

Access to Document

10.1007/s10912-020-09607-9

Cite this

@article{0657e4158dd8427596820e5315215e7d,

title = "The Cultural Politics of {\textquoteleft}Implementation Science{\textquoteright}",

abstract = "Despite the growing profile of {\textquoteleft}implementation science{\textquoteright}, its status as a field of study remains ambiguous. Implementation science originates in the evidence-based movement and attempts to broaden the scope of evidence-based medicine to improve {\textquoteleft}clinical effectiveness{\textquoteright} and close the {\textquoteleft}implementation gap{\textquoteright}. To achieve this agenda, implementation science draws on methodologies from the social sciences to emphasise coherence between qualitative and quantitative approaches. In so doing, we ask if this is at the expense of ignoring the dominating tendencies of the evidence-based movement and consider if some of the methodologies being drawn on should be considered irreconcilable with evidence-based methodologies.",

keywords = "Implementation science, Interdisciplinarity, Qualitative vs quantitative",

author = "Richard Boulton and Jane Sandall and Nick Sevdalis",

year = "2020",

month = sep,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1007/s10912-020-09607-9",

language = "English",

volume = "41",

pages = "379--394",

journal = "Journal of Medical Humanities",

issn = "1041-3545",

publisher = "Springer",

number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Cultural Politics of ‘Implementation Science’

AU - Boulton, Richard

AU - Sandall, Jane

AU - Sevdalis, Nick

PY - 2020/9/1

Y1 - 2020/9/1

N2 - Despite the growing profile of ‘implementation science’, its status as a field of study remains ambiguous. Implementation science originates in the evidence-based movement and attempts to broaden the scope of evidence-based medicine to improve ‘clinical effectiveness’ and close the ‘implementation gap’. To achieve this agenda, implementation science draws on methodologies from the social sciences to emphasise coherence between qualitative and quantitative approaches. In so doing, we ask if this is at the expense of ignoring the dominating tendencies of the evidence-based movement and consider if some of the methodologies being drawn on should be considered irreconcilable with evidence-based methodologies.

AB - Despite the growing profile of ‘implementation science’, its status as a field of study remains ambiguous. Implementation science originates in the evidence-based movement and attempts to broaden the scope of evidence-based medicine to improve ‘clinical effectiveness’ and close the ‘implementation gap’. To achieve this agenda, implementation science draws on methodologies from the social sciences to emphasise coherence between qualitative and quantitative approaches. In so doing, we ask if this is at the expense of ignoring the dominating tendencies of the evidence-based movement and consider if some of the methodologies being drawn on should be considered irreconcilable with evidence-based methodologies.

KW - Implementation science

KW - Interdisciplinarity

KW - Qualitative vs quantitative

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85078120602&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s10912-020-09607-9

DO - 10.1007/s10912-020-09607-9

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85078120602

SN - 1041-3545

VL - 41

SP - 379

EP - 394

JO - Journal of Medical Humanities

JF - Journal of Medical Humanities

IS - 3

ER -

The Cultural Politics of ‘Implementation Science’

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this