"What We Have Here, Is a Failure to [Replicate]"

Ways to Solve a Replication Crisis in Implementation Science

Published in: Prevention Science (2021). doi: 10.1007/s11121-021-01286-9

by Matthew Chinman, Joie D. Acosta, Patricia A. Ebener, Amy L. Shearer

Read More

Access further information on this document at Springer

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

Adapting the classic line from the 1967 film Cool Hand Luke, the title is meant to convey that implementation science (IS), like other fields, has not been embracing replication studies, which is a key component to the open science movement. The purpose of this article is to review what is known about replication of implementation trials and identify the gaps and next steps to continue increasing the transparency, openness, and replicability of implementation research. After presenting an overview of study replication and how it is a key component of open science, the article will examine how replication of implementation studies has (or more accurately has not) been approached in IS. As will be discussed, replication in IS shares some challenges with studies that attempt to replicate interventions, but also presents unique challenges. This article discusses different types of replications (e.g., direct vs. conceptual) and how they can benefit the field of IS. The article then presents a specific example of an implementation strategy called Getting To Outcomes© to describe how to design a replication study and interpret the results. The article ends with multiple options implementation scientists could consider to improve the likelihood and quality of replication studies. The discussion also envisions how implementation science can enable researchers and practitioners to work together in real-world contexts to encourage wide replication of implementation studies and advance the goal of improving public health.

Research conducted by

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/research-integrity.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.