Table 3.
Ratings assigned to CFIR constructs amongst high and low success schools
| High implementation success |  |
Low implementation success | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| School ID | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | |
| 1. Intervention characteristics | ||||||
| Intervention Source | E | E | E | E | E | |
| Evidence Strength and Quality | + 2 | + 2 | + 1 | + 2 | + 1 | |
| Relative Advantage | + 1 | Missing | 0 | + 1 | Missing | |
| Adaptability | + 1 | + 2 | + 1 | + 1 | + 2 | |
| Trialability | + 2 | + 2 | + 2 | + 2 | + 2 | |
| Complexity (reverse rated) | 0 | 0 | -1 | −2 | −2 | a |
| Design Quality and Packaging | 0 | Mixed | Mixed | −1 | Mixed | |
| Cost | 0 | Missing | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| Personal Impact | + 1 | + 1 | + 1 | Mixed | + 1a | |
| 2. Outer setting | ||||||
| Patient Needs and Resources | + 1 | + 2 | + 1 | + 1 | + 1 | |
| Cosmopolitanism | Missing | Missing | Missing | Missing | Missing | |
| Peer Pressure | Missing | Missing | Missing | Missing | Missing | |
| External Policy and Incentives | + 1 | + 1 | + 1 | + 1 | + 1 | |
| 3. Inner setting | ||||||
| Structural Characteristics | + 1 | + 1 | X | −2 | + 1 | a |
| Networks and Communications | + 2 | + 2 | X | −2 | − 2 | b |
| Culture | Missing | Missing | Missing | Missing | Missing | |
| Implementation Climate: | ||||||
| Tension for change | + 2 | Missing | + 2 | + 2 | Missing | |
| Compatibility | + 2 | + 1 | + 1 | −1 | −1a | a |
| Relative priority | + 2 | + 2 | + 1 | −2 | −2 | b |
| Organizational Incentives and Rewards | Missing | Missing | Missing | Missing | Missing | |
| Goals and Feedback | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| Learning climate | + 2 | + 1 | Mixed | −1 | Mixed | a |
| Readiness for Implementation: | ||||||
| Leadership Engagement | + 2 | + 2 | + 2 | −2 | −2 | b |
| Available resources | −1 | −2 | − 2 | −2 | − 1 | |
| Access to knowledge and information | Mixed | Mixed | + 1 | Mixed | 0 | |
| 4. Characterisitics of individuals | ||||||
| Knowledge and beliefs about the intervention | + 2 | + 2 | + 2 | −2 | −1 | b |
| Self-efficacy | Missing | Missing | Missing | Missing | Missing | |
| Individual Stage of Change | Mixed | + 1 | + 1 | Mixed | + 1 | |
| Individual Identification with Organisation | M | M | M | M | M | |
| Other Personal Attributes | + 1a | + 1 | Mixed | Mixed | + 1 | |
| 5. Process | ||||||
| Planning | + 2 | + 2 | + 1 | + 1 | −1 | a |
| Engaging: | ||||||
| Opinion Leaders | Missing | Missing | Missing | Missing | Missing | |
| Formally Appointed Internal Implementation Leaders | + 2 | + 2 | −1 | −2 | − 1 | b |
| Champions | Missing | Missing | Missing | + 2 | + 1 | |
| External Change Agents | + 1 | + 1 | + 1 | + 1 | 0 | |
| Key Stakeholders | 0 | 0 | + 2 | −1 | + 1a | |
| Innovation Participants | + 1 | + 1 | + 2 | + 2a | + 1 | |
| Executing | + 2 | + 2 | −2 | −2 | −2 | b |
| Reflecting and Evaluating | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
E Treated MT as externally developed; I Treated MT as internally developed; ‘Mixed’ indicates a mix of positive and negative valency; Missing: indicates no qualitative data was found to correspond to the construct; A a denoted that the construct weakly distinguished between successful and less successful schools and b denotes that the construct strongly distinguished between them