↓ Skip to main content

Assessing the organizational context for EBP implementation: the development and validity testing of the Implementation Climate Scale (ICS)

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
29 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
318 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
334 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Assessing the organizational context for EBP implementation: the development and validity testing of the Implementation Climate Scale (ICS)
Published in
Implementation Science, October 2014
DOI 10.1186/s13012-014-0157-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mark G Ehrhart, Gregory A Aarons, Lauren R Farahnak

Abstract

BackgroundAlthough the importance of the organizational environment for implementing evidence-based practices (EBP) has been widely recognized, there are limited options for measuring implementation climate in public sector health settings. The goal of this research was to develop and test a measure of EBP implementation climate that would both capture a broad range of issues important for effective EBP implementation and be of practical use to researchers and managers seeking to understand and improve the implementation of EBPs.MethodsParticipants were 630 clinicians working in 128 work groups in 32 US-based mental health agencies. Items to measure climate for EBP implementation were developed based on past literature on implementation climate and other strategic climates and in consultation with experts on the implementation of EBPs in mental health settings. The sample was randomly split at the work group level of analysis; half of the sample was used for exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and the other half was used for confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The entire sample was utilized for additional analyses assessing the reliability, support for level of aggregation, and construct-based evidence of validity.ResultsThe EFA resulted in a final factor structure of six dimensions for the Implementation Climate Scale (ICS): 1) focus on EBP, 2) educational support for EBP, 3) recognition for EBP, 4) rewards for EBP, 5) selection for EBP, and 6) selection for openness. This structure was supported in the other half of the sample using CFA. Additional analyses supported the reliability and construct-based evidence of validity for the ICS, as well as the aggregation of the measure to the work group level.ConclusionsThe ICS is a very brief (18 item) and pragmatic measure of a strategic climate for EBP implementation. It captures six dimensions of the organizational context that indicate to employees the extent to which their organization prioritizes and values the successful implementation of EBPs. The ICS can be used by researchers to better understand the role of the organizational context on implementation outcomes and by organizations to evaluate their current climate as they consider how to improve the likelihood of implementation success.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 334 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 <1%
United States 3 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Bangladesh 1 <1%
Unknown 325 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 63 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 47 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 45 13%
Student > Master 38 11%
Other 26 8%
Other 60 18%
Unknown 55 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 72 22%
Social Sciences 53 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 47 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 42 13%
Business, Management and Accounting 15 4%
Other 29 9%
Unknown 76 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 February 2021.
All research outputs
#1,878,443
of 25,732,188 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#346
of 1,820 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,964
of 274,135 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#6
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,732,188 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,820 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 274,135 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.