Table 3.

NoMaD instrument as adapted for revalidation

Domains	Sub- domains	Sub-domain questions
Coherence	Differentiation	How does revalidation differ from usual ways of working?
	Communal Specification	Do participants have a shared understanding of the purpose of revalidation?
	Individual Specification	How does revalidation affect the work for participants?
	Internalisation	Can participants see the potential value of revalidation?
Cognitive participation	Initiation	Are there key people who drive the revalidation forward and get others involved?
	Legitimation	Do participants believe that being involved in revalidation is a legitimate part of their role?
	Enrolment	Are participants open to working with others in new ways for the purposed of revalidation?
	Activation	Are participants willing to support revalidation?
Collective action	Interactional workability	Can participants easily integrate revalidation into their existing work?
	Relational integration	Does being involved in revalidation disrupt working relationships? Do participants have confidence in other people’s ability to carry out revalidation?
	Skill set workability	Do participants believe work is assigned to those with appropriate skills to carry out revalidation? Is sufficient training provided to enable participants to enact revalidation?
	Contextual integration	Are sufficient resources available to support revalidation? Do management adequately support revalidation?
Reflexive monitoring	Systemisation	Are participants aware of reports about the effects of the revalidation?
	Communal appraisal	Do participants agree that revalidation is worthwhile?
	Individual appraisal	Do participants value the effects revalidation has on their work?
	Reconfiguration	Is feedback about revalidation used to improve it in the future? Do participants modify how they work with revalidation?

Source: Finch et al. 2015 [18]