↓ Skip to main content

Development and testing of the Measure of Innovation-Specific Implementation Intentions (MISII) using Rasch measurement theory

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, June 2018
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 (81st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
17 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
93 Mendeley
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
Development and testing of the Measure of Innovation-Specific Implementation Intentions (MISII) using Rasch measurement theory
Published in
Implementation Science, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13012-018-0782-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joanna C. Moullin, Mark G. Ehrhart, Gregory A. Aarons

Abstract

Implementation is proposed to be a multiphase, multilevel process. After a period of exploration, an adoption decision is made, typically at the upper management or policy level. Nevertheless, movement through each of the subsequent phases of the implementation process involves clinicians or providers at the individual level to adopt the innovation and then change their behavior to use/deliver the innovation. Multiple behavioral change theories propose that intentions are a critical determinant of implementation behavior. However, there is a need for the development and testing of pragmatic measures of providers' intentions to use a specific innovation or evidence-based practice (EBP). Nine items were developed to assess providers' intentions to use a specific innovation or EBP. Motivational interviewing was the EBP in the study. Items were administered, as part of larger survey, to 179 providers across 38 substance use disorder treatment (SUDT) programs within five agencies in California, USA. Rasch analysis was conducted using RUMM2030 software to assess the items, their overall fit to the Rasch model, the response scale used, individual item fit, differential item functioning (DIF), and person separation. Following a stepwise process, the scale was reduced from nine items to three items to increase the feasibility and acceptability of the scale while maintaining suitable psychometric properties. The three-item unidimensional scale showed good person separation (PSI = .872), no disordering of thresholds, and no evidence of uniform or non-uniform DIF. Rasch analysis supported the viability of the scale as a measure of implementation intentions. The Measure of Innovation-Specific Implementation Intentions (MISII) is a sound measure of providers' intentions to use a specific innovation or EBP. Future evaluation of convergent, divergent, and predictive validity are needed. The study also demonstrates the value of Rasch analysis for testing the psychometric properties of pragmatic implementation measures.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 93 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 12%
Student > Master 9 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 10%
Professor 5 5%
Other 17 18%
Unknown 30 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 18 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 10%
Social Sciences 8 9%
Engineering 5 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Other 14 15%
Unknown 36 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 28 November 2018.
All research outputs
#3,035,534
of 23,580,560 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#659
of 1,729 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,244
of 330,008 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#24
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,580,560 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,729 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 330,008 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.