The types of determinants that you need to measure will be informed by the theory, model, or framework (TMF) that is guiding your design. Most TMFs note the importance of measuring the characteristics of the evidence-based practice and the characteristics of the implementers, as these factors may shape the implementation process. In addition, most TMFs also point to the relevance of internal context and external context during implementation. The readings below provide a starting place for considering the measurement of implementation determinants, but you should also search for measures that have been directly linked to your TMF.
A key resource for identifying measures of implementation determinants across a range of TMFs is the ASSESS section of the D&I Models Webtool. There are a wide array of instruments in their repository, including both implementation outcomes and implementation determinants (see “Explore D&I Assessment Instruments). Watch a webinar providing training on this section of the D&I Models Webtool.
In this review by Lewis and colleagues, they describe how intervention characteristics influence implementation outcomes, making it critical that researcher use reliable and valid measures, while also identifying substantial measurement gaps that are needed to advance the field.
This review by Stanick and colleagues provides a systematic evaluation of measures assessing individual‑level characteristics relevant to implementation, highlighting the psychometric strengths, weaknesses, and gaps in existing instruments to guide more rigorous and pragmatic measurement in implementation research.
Although focused on behavioral health settings, this review by Powell and colleagues has broader applicability in that it provides a systematic review of measures of organizational culture, organizational climate, and implementation climate, critically evaluates their psychometric quality, and offers clear guidance to improve measurement rigor in implementation research.
This review by Weiner and colleagues is also relevant for measuring three inner contextual factors: leadership engagement, available resources, and access to knowledge and information.
This review by McHugh and colleagues systematically evaluates the availability and psychometric quality of measures for outer setting constructs, highlighting critical gaps and guiding implementation researchers toward more rigorous, reliable measurement of contextual factors that influence implementation outcomes.
Although this article by Chaudoir and colleagues is somewhat older, it systematically catalogues multi-level measures of implementation determinants, which can assist researchers in selecting valid, reliable measures for implementation studies.
