The CFIR outlines five domains and the common constructs for each of these [21]: 1. Intervention characteristics look at the intervention’s thenthereby complexity, source, strength and quality of evidence, relative advantage, ability to be trialed, quality of design and packaging, and cost. 2. The outer setting includes the patient’s need and resources, cosmopolitanism (the degree to which a group or organization is networked with other organizations), peer pressure and any incentives or external policies that could affect implementation. 3. The inner setting considers structural contexts of an organization, the nature and quality of social networks and formal/informal communications within an organization, the culture of a given setting in terms of its norms, values and basic assumptions, and readiness for implementation.

4. The characteristics of individuals are constructs that include the knowledge and beliefs held by individuals toward the intervention, self-efficacy (individual belief in the capacity to achieve the goals of the implementation), the individual state of change (the phase an individual is in during a given point of progress toward sustained use of the intervention), the individual identification with the organization, and other personal attributes such as motivation, values, competence, and so forth. 5. The process considers the constructs of planning, engaging appropriate individuals (for example, opinion leaders), executing the implementation, and reflecting and evaluating.

While the CFIR is relatively new, it is considered a useful tool not only for understanding implementation itself, but also for ensuring more effective implementations [20]. Knowledge translation planning Planning a KT Cilengitide strategy, regardless of the definition and framework used, benefits from guiding questions that allow organization of this process. Lavis and colleagues offer five questions for KT planning that ask [22]: 1. What is the message or knowledge to be transferred? 2. To whom should it be transferred? 3. By whom should it be transferred? 4. How should it be transferred? 5. What is the desired effect or impact? These five questions inform each other, so this is rarely a linear process. As consideration is given to one area, it may require adjustments in others. What is the message or knowledge to be transferred? The amount selleck of evidence available to physicians has increased dramatically in recent years [23] and many evidence-based recommendations have been developed that aim to improve patient care. This explosion of available information means that scrutiny of the quality of evidence being translated at the outset of this process is crucial.