Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Feb 28;14(1):51.
doi: 10.1186/s13643-025-02786-3.

Research priority setting for implementation science and practice: a living systematic review protocol

Junqiang Zhao #  1   2   3 , Wenjun Chen #  4 , Wenhui Bai  5 , Xiaoyan Zhang  6 , Ruixue Hui  7 , Sihan Chen  8 , Guillaume Fontaine  9 , Xiaolin Wei  10 , Ning Zhang  11   12 , Ian D Graham  13   14
Affiliations

Research priority setting for implementation science and practice: a living systematic review protocol

Junqiang Zhao et al. Syst Rev. .

Abstract

Background: Research priority setting has the potential to bridge knowledge gaps, optimize resource allocation, foster collaborations, and inform funding directions for implementation science and practice when these priorities are properly acted upon. This systematic review aims to determine the extent of research in priority setting for implementation science and practice, examine the methodologies employed, synthesize these research priorities, and identify strategies for evaluating and implementing these priorities.

Methods: We will conduct a living systematic review following the Cochrane guidance. We will search literature from six databases, the website of James Lind Alliance, five implementation science-focused journals and several related journals, Google Scholar, and the reference lists of included studies. Two reviewers will independently screen studies based on the eligibility criteria. The characteristics of the included documents, their prioritization methods, and outcomes, as well as the evaluation and implementation strategies, will be extracted. We will critically appraise these documents using the nine common themes of good practice for research priority setting, and synthesize data using a narrative approach. We will re-run the search 12 months after the original search date to monitor the development of new literature and determine the time to update the review.

Discussions: By conducting this living systematic review, we will gain a comprehensive and dynamic understanding of the potential research gaps and hotspots in implementation science as perceived by researchers and practitioners. The findings of this review will inform the future research directions of implementation science and practice.

Systematic review registration: This review has been registered with the Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/sr69k ).

Keywords: Implementation science; Knowledge mobilization; Living systematic review; Priority setting; Research agenda.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: Not applicable. Consent for publication: Not applicable for the protocol. Competing interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

    1. Eccles M, Mittman S. Welcome to implementation science. Implement Sci. 2006;1(1):1.
    1. Grimshaw JM, et al. Knowledge translation of research findings. Implement Sci. 2012;7:50. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Nilsen P. Making sense of implementation theories, models and frameworks. Implement Sci. 2015;10:53. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Esmail R, et al. A scoping review of full-spectrum knowledge translation theories, models, and frameworks. Implement Sci. 2020;15(1):11. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Strifler L, et al. Scoping review identifies significant number of knowledge translation theories, models, and frameworks with limited use. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018;100:92–102. - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources