Health Research Policy and Systems (Aug 2023)

Combining systems thinking approaches and implementation science constructs within community-based prevention: a systematic review

  • Jillian Whelan,
  • Penny Fraser,
  • Kristy A. Bolton,
  • Penelope Love,
  • Claudia Strugnell,
  • Tara Boelsen-Robinson,
  • Miranda R. Blake,
  • Erik Martin,
  • Steven Allender,
  • Colin Bell

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-023-01023-4
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 21, no. 1
pp. 1 – 15

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background Systems science offers methods for designing population health interventions while implementation science provides specific guidance for successful implementation. Integrating systems and implementation science may strengthen implementation and enhance and sustain systemic change to achieve system-level outcomes. Little is known about the extent to which these two approaches have been integrated to date. This review aimed to identify and synthesise the peer-reviewed literature that has reported the combined use of systems thinking approaches and implementation science constructs (within the same study), to deliver population health interventions. Methods A systematic literature search of peer-reviewed original research was conducted across six databases from 2009 to 2021. Journal manuscripts were included if they: (1) reported on a population health study conducted in a community, (2) reported the use of a systems method in the design of the intervention, and (3) used an implementation science theory, framework or model in the delivery of the intervention. Data extracted related to the specific systems methods and definitions and implementation science constructs used. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) was used to assess study quality. Results Of the 9086 manuscripts returned, 320 manuscripts were included for full-text review. Of these, 17 manuscripts that reported on 14 studies were included in the final extraction. The most frequently reported systems methods were a ‘whole of community systems approach’ (n = 4/14) and ‘community-based system dynamics’ (n = 2/14). Nineteen different implementation science theories, frameworks and models were used for intervention delivery, with RE-AIM being the only framework used in more than one study. Conclusion There are few published peer-reviewed studies using systems thinking and implementation science for designing and delivering population health interventions. An exploration of synergies is worthwhile to operationalise alignment and improve implementation of systems thinking approaches. Review protocol registration PROSPERO CRD42021250419.

Keywords