Table 2.
Characteristics of included guidelines and internal validity.
| Reference Name* (Year) Ref. Country |
Related reports [Ref.] | Focus i) Designing scaling intervention ii) Reporting implementation intervention | Number of items | Funding source† |
Conflict of interest information (Yes, No) | Internal validity‡ (High, Low) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reach, efficacy, adoption, implementation, and maintenance framework (1999)[25] United States of America |
[26] | i | 31 | Public | No | Low |
| USAID and Management Sciences for Health (2002)[27] United States of America |
– | i | 10 | No info | No | Low |
| Reviewer Guidelines for Reports of Public Health Interventions (2003)[28] Canada |
– | ii | 19 | No info | No | Low |
| Transparent Reporting of Evaluations with nonrandomized Designs (2004)[29] United States of America |
– | ii | 58 | No info | No | High |
| ExpandNet/WHO framework for scaling up (2007)[8] Switzerland |
[18,30–32] | i | 27 | Public/private | No | High |
| Riley et al (2008)[33] Canada |
– | ii | 16 | Public/private | Yes | Low |
| Egan et al (2009)[34] United Kingdom |
– | ii | 10 | Public | Yes | Low |
| Framework for reporting health service delivery models for managing rheumatoid arthritis (2010)[35] Canada |
[36] | ii | 10 | Yes | High | |
| Bryce et al (2011)[37] United States of America |
– | i | 7 | Public/private | Yes | High |
| Conn & Groves (2011)[38] United States of America |
– | ii | 5 | Public | No | Low |
| Eaton et al (2011)[39] Nigeria |
– | i | 9 | No info | Yes | High |
| WHO/ExpandNet (2011)[40] Switzerland |
– | i | 12 | Public/private | No | High |
| Framework for explaining successful scale-up (2011)[41] United States of America |
– | i | 6 | No info | Yes | Low |
| AIDED model for scale-up (2012)[42] United States of America |
– | i | 5 | Private | Yes | Low |
| Reporting standards for studies of tailored interventions (2012)[43] United States of America |
– | ii | 7 | No info | Yes | Low |
| Guide for Monitoring Scale-up of Health Practices and Interventions (2013)[44] United States of America |
– | i | 10 | No info | No | Low |
| Workgroup for Intervention Development and Evaluation Research recommendations (2013)[45] Canada |
[46] | ii | 20 | Public | Yes | High |
| Duncan et al (2013)[47] United States of America |
– | ii | 21 | No info | No | Low |
| The Oxford Implementation Index (2013)[48] United Kingdom |
– | ii | 32 | Public | Yes | High |
| Proctor et al (2013)[49] United States of America |
– | ii | 10 | Public | Yes | Low |
| Dickson et al (2014)[50] United States of America |
– | i | 4 | Public/private | Yes | High |
| Template for intervention description and replication (2014)[51] United Kingdom |
– | ii | 12 | Public/private | Yes | High |
| Global framework implementation criteria for pilot test (2014)[52] United States of America |
– | ii | 17 | Public | Yes | High |
| Multiplicative scale-up framework (2014)[53] Switzerland |
– | i | 17 | No info | No | Low |
| mHealth Assessment and Planning for Scale (2015)[54] Switzerland |
– | i | 38 | Public/private | No | High |
| Neta et al (2015)[55] United States of America |
– | ii | 30 | Public | No | High |
| Guidelines for Reporting Evaluations based on Observational Methodology (2015)[56] Spain |
– | ii | 14 | Public | No | High |
| CCDR (2016)[57] Canada |
– | ii | 20 | No info | No | Low |
| Barker et al (2016)[58] United States of America |
– | i | 4 | Private | Yes | Low |
| Scaling Up Management Framework (2016)[59] United States of America |
– | i | 14 | Private | No | Low |
| Hales et al (2016)[60] Switzerland |
[61] | ii | 64 | Public | Yes | High |
| Milat et al (2016)[6] Australia |
[62–64] | i | 20 | Public | Yes | High |
| Standards for QUality Improvement Reporting Excellence (2016)[65] United States of America |
[66–69] | ii | 40 | Private | Yes | High |
| Indig et al (2017)[70] Australia |
– | i | 6 | Public | Yes | High |
| Programme Reporting Standards (2017)[71] Switzerland |
– | ii | 47 | Public | Yes | High |
| Standards for Reporting Implementation Studies (2017)[72] United Kingdom |
[73,74] | ii | 37 | Public | Yes | High |
| Consolidated advice for reporting ECD implementation research (2018)[75] United States of America |
– | ii | 21 | Public | Yes | High |
| McLean & Gargani (2019)[9] Canada |
[76] | i | 12 | Public | No | High |
| Reeves et al (2019)[77] Australia |
– | ii | 8 | No info | Yes | Low |
AIDED = model for scale up of family health innovations, CCDR = Canada Communicable Disease Report, USAID = United States Agency for International Development, WHO = World Health Organization.
*
Authors or organizations if no name was identified.
†
Public (governmental/intergovernmental), private (for profit/no-profit); no info (no info or no funding declared).
‡
Based on a 3-item internal validity assessment tool (high if ≥2 “yes” and low if <2 “yes”).