Skip to main content

Table 3 Characteristics of intended context of use of included tools

From: Tools for assessing the scalability of innovations in health: a systematic review

Name (abbreviation)a [References]

Income level context

Healthcare level

Focus area

Sex or gender of beneficiaries of the targeted innovations

End-user of tool

Aim of tool

Degree of report of validity evidence for content validityb

Methodological quality of toolsc

Innovation Scalability Self-administered Questionnaire (ISSaQ) [2, 3]

High-income country

Primary healthcare

Not found

Female, male

Clinician, policy-maker, researcher

Assess the scalability of innovations in primary healthcare

2

Inadequate

AnalySe de la Transférabilité et accompagnement à l’Adaptation des Interventions en pRomotion de la santE (ASTAIRE) [53, 54]

High-income country

Not found

Health prevention or promotion

Not found

Not found

Assess transferability and adaptation of health promotion innovations

3

Doubtful

WHO/ExpendNet [123, 124]

Not found

Not found

Not found

Not found

Researcher, policy-maker, programme manager, funder

Assess the scalability of programmatic research; provide a quick assessment of how easy or difficult it will be to scale up a project that is being planned or proposed or is in the process of implementation

2

Doubtful

Scalability Checklist [127,128,129]

Not found

Primary healthcare

Reproductive, maternal, newborn, child or adolescent health

Not found

Not found

Prioritize alternatives and identify actions that can be taken to simplify the scaling-up process

2

Doubtful

Baker et al. [47]

Not found

Primary healthcare, home care, public or population health

Reproductive, maternal, newborn, child or adolescent health

Female

Not found

Assess the applicability and transferability of innovations to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander setting

2

Inadequate

Bennett et al. [48]

Low- or middle-income country

Primary healthcare

Reproductive, maternal, newborn, child or adolescent health

Not found

Not found

Explore feasibility and effectiveness of health innovations

1

Inadequate

Burchett et al. [50]

Not found

Public or population health

Not found

Not found

Not found

Assist in the assessment of applicability and transferability

2

Inadequate

Burchett et al. [51]

Low- or middle-income country

Primary healthcare, public or population health

Reproductive, maternal, newborn, child or adolescent health

Not found

Not found

Assess a study’s applicability and transferability

2

Inadequate

Cambon et al. [52]

Low-, middle- or high-income country

Public or population health

Health prevention or promotion

Not found

Not found

Guide and assess transferability

2

Inadequate

Process model for the assessment of transferability (PIET-T) [55]

Not found

Not found

Health prevention or promotion

Not found

Not found

Accompany the steps for determining transferability

2

Inadequate

Spicer et al. [56]

Low- or middle-income country

Primary healthcare

Reproductive, maternal, newborn, child or adolescent health

Not found

Researcher

Increase the prospects of government adoption and community uptake of innovations at scale

1

Inadequate

Wang et al. [58]

Not found

Public or population health

Not found

Not found

Not found

Assess applicability and transferability from a study setting to a local setting using evidence about both the local setting and the public health innovation of interest

1

Inadequate

Milat et al. [20, 21, 120]

High-income country

Public or population health

Health prevention or promotion

Not found

Policy-maker, researcher

Explore whether an innovation is scalable

2

Inadequate

CORRECT attributesd [6, 121, 122]

Low- or middle-income country

Primary healthcare, public or population health

Reproductive, maternal, newborn, child or adolescent health

Not found

Researcher, manager, funder

Assess the attributes that determine the scalability of the innovation and identify needed actions

2

Doubtful

Bhattacharyya et al. [49]

Transnational

Not found

Not found

Not found

Policy-maker, funder

Assess promising low- or middle-income country innovations for adaptation in high-income countries and identify those with high potential for more in-depth review and evaluation

3

Doubtful

Scalability assessment framework [57]

Low-, middle- or high-income country

Public or population health

Education, nutrition, sanitation, hygiene or international development more broadly

Female, male

Not found

Expand or replicate as part of a planned scaling-up process

2

Inadequate

Intervention Scalability Assessment Tool (ISAT) [22]

High-income country

Public or population health

Not found

Not found

Clinician, policy-maker

Assist practitioners, policy-makers, programme managers, and researchers to determine the scalability of a discrete health programme

3

Doubtful

Readiness to Spread Assessment Scoring Sheet [125]

High-income country

Not found

Not found

Not found

Manager

Help programme champions and leadership understand whether a promising practice is ripe for successful spread across organizations

1

Inadequate

Readiness to Receive Assessment Scoring Sheet [126]

High-income country

Not found

Not found

Not found

Manager

Help a site determine its readiness to receive an effective practice from elsewhere

1

Inadequate

Applicability and Transferability of Evidence Tool (A&T Tool) [118, 119]

Not found

Public or population health

Not found

Not found

Manager

Assist public health managers and planners in decision-making about programme priorities for their community

2

Doubtful

Scalability Assessment and Planning (SAP) Toolkit [130]

Not found

Not found

Reproductive, maternal, newborn, child or adolescent health

Not found

Not found

Guide scaling and assessment planning with corrective actions to strengthen or enable scale-up

1

Doubtful

  1. aWe did not find names for 10 of the tools, in which case we indicate names of authors or organizations
  2. bWe found no discussion or data presented as a source of validity evidence for the eight other measurement properties. 1 = Only a limited amount of data (e.g. simply listing items without justification); 2 = listing items with some references and justifications, limited description of the process for creating the tool; 3 = well-defined process for developing tool content, including both an explicit theoretical, conceptual or practical basis for the tool items and systematic item review by experts
  3. cAccording to COSMIN definitions, a standard is rated as “doubtful” if it is doubtful whether the quality aspect is adequate (i.e. minor methodological flaws), and “inadequate” when evidence is provided that the quality aspect is not adequate (i.e. important methodological flaws)
  4. dCORRECT attributes: C—credible in that they are based on sound evidence or advocated by respected persons or institutions; O—observable to ensure that potential users can see the results in practice; R—relevant for addressing persistent or sharply felt problems; R—relative advantage over existing practices so that potential users are convinced the costs of implementation are warranted by the benefits; E—easy to install and understand rather than complex and complicated; C—compatible with the potential users’ established values, norms and facilities; fit well into the practices of the national programme; and T—testable so that potential users can see the innovation on a small scale prior to large-scale adoption