From: Enhancing review criteria for dissemination and implementation science grants
INSPECT criterion | Rating scale | Total average, M (SD) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | ||
The care, quality, community gap, or need | 0 (0%) | 1 (6%) | 9 (50%) | 8 (44%) | 2.39 (0.61) |
The evidence-based treatment to be implemented | 0 (0%) | 4 (22%) | 9 (50%) | 5 (28%) | 2.06 (0.73) |
Conceptual model, theory or framework, and theoretical justification | 0 (0%) | 7 (39%) | 7 (39%) | 4 (22%) | 1.83 (0.79) |
Stakeholder priorities and engagement in change | 1 (6%) | 4 (22%) | 9 (50%) | 4 (22%) | 1.89 (0.83) |
Settings readiness to adopt new services/treatment/programs | 2 (11%) | 10 (56%) | 5 (28%) | 1 (6%) | 1.28 (0.75) |
D&I strategy/process | 3 (17%) | 3 (17%) | 9 (50%) | 3 (17%) | 1.67 (0.97) |
Team experience with setting, treatment, and D&I process | 0 (0%) | 3 (17%) | 12 (67%) | 3 (17%) | 2.00 (0.59) |
Feasibility of proposed research design and methods | 3 (17%) | 6 (33%) | 9 (50%) | 0 (0%) | 1.33 (0.77) |
Measurement and analysis | 2 (11%) | 8 (44%) | 3 (17%) | 5 (28%) | 1.61 (1.04) |
Policy/funding environment and leverage or support for sustaining change | 3 (17%) | 7 (39%) | 5 (28%) | 3 (17%) | 1.44 (0.98) |