Table 6 Group analysis of the frameworks
EMTReK | EPIS | Iowa | KTA | PARIHS | PRISM | Barwick planning tool |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Good for dissemination for completed research but not for continuum Useful for research design from perspective of dissemination Not useful for implementation Missing prioritization | Widely used in different settings Focuses on implementation stages Has its own jargon Terminology not clear Suitable for quality improvement projects/specific use | Change management style Addresses needs and priorities Good for quality improvement projects Focuses on implementation | Widely used, range of stakeholders Engagement with stakeholders not clear Process—unclear Cycle—all stages Easy to follow but needs guidance on use Specifics missing | Widely used, suitable for clinical settings Resource-intensive—needs facilitators More for implementation Complex | Transferable for different disciplines Contains good components Addresses continuum and sustainability Includes patients/stakeholders Useful for design, dissemination, and implementation Has practical orientation Does not focus on Knowledge Exchange | Useful and practical for researchers Concentrates on KT Focuses on design, not on implementation Great tool but not a TMF |