Optimising the Conceptualisation of Context; Comment on “Stakeholder Perspectives of Attributes and Features of Context Relevant to Knowledge Translation in Health Settings: A Multi-country Analysis”

Document Type : Commentary


1 Faculty of Health & Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK

2 University College Dublin Centre for Interdisciplinary Research, Education, and Innovation in Health Systems (UCD IRIS), University College Dublin, Dublin 4, Ireland

3 Health Sciences Centre, School of Nursing, Midwifery & Health Systems, University College Dublin, Dublin 4, Ireland

4 School of Allied and Public Health Professions, Canterbury Christ Church University, Canterbury, UK


Context matters. Therefore, efforts to develop greater conceptual clarity are important for science and practice. In this commentary, we outline some key issues that were prompted by Squires and colleagues’ contribution. Specifically, we reinforce context as an interactive concept and therefore something that is hard to ‘pin down,’ the problematic nature of conceptualising context in implementation and de-implementation, and a requirement for the development of culturally sensitive understandings. Finally, we suggest it is vital that continued investment into providing a more comprehensive list of determinants needs to be accompanied by an equal effort in developing practical methods and tools to support use and application.


  1. Kitson A, Harvey G, McCormack B. Approaches to implementing research in practice. Quality in Health Care. 1998;7:149-159.
  2. McCormack B, Kitson A, Harvey G, et al. Getting evidence into practice: the meaning of ‘context.’ J Adv Nurs. 2002;38(1):94-104. doi:1046/j.1365-2648.2002.02150.x
  3. Rycroft-Malone J, Burton C, Wilkinson J, et al Collective action for implementation: a realist evaluation of organisational collaboration in healthcare. Implement Sci. 2016;11:17 doi:1186/s13012-016-0380-z
  4. Squires JE, Hutchinson AM, Coughlin M, et al. Stakeholder perspectives of attributes and features of context relevant to knowledge translation in health settings: a multi-country analysis. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2022;11(8):1373-1390. doi:34172/ijhpm.2021.32
  5. Pfadenhauer LM, Mozygemba K, Gerhardus A, et al. Context and implementation: A concept analysis towards conceptual maturity. Zeitschrift für Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualität im Gesundheitswesen. 2015;109(2):103-114.
  6. Rogers L, De Brún A, McAuliffe E. Defining and assessing context in healthcare implementation studies: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2020;20:591. doi:1186/s12913-020-05212-7
  7. Plsek PE, Greenhalgh T. The challenge of complexity in health care. BMJ. 2001;323:625-628.
  8. Braithwaite J, Churruca K, Long JC, Ellis LA, Herkes J. When complexity science meets implementation science: a theoretical and empirical analysis of systems change. BMC Med. 2018;16:63. doi:1186/s12916-018-1057-z
  9. Rogers L, De Brún A, McAuliffe E. Development of an integrative coding framework for evaluating context within implementation science. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020;20:158. doi:1186/s12874-020-01044-5
  10. Burton CR, Williams L, Bucknall T et al. Theory and practical guidance for effective de-implementation of practices across health and care services: a realist synthesis. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2021. doi:3310/hsdr09020
  11. World Bank. https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/906519-world-bank-country-and-lending-groups. Accessed October 3, 2021.
  12. Rogers L, De Brún A, Birken SA, Davies C, McAuliffe E. Context counts: a qualitative study exploring the interplay between context and implementation success. J Health Organ Manag. 2021. doi:1108/JHOM-07-2020-0296
  13. Haines ER, Dopp A, Lyon AR, et al. Harmonizing evidence-based practice, implementation context, and implementation strategies with user-centered design: a case example in young adult cancer care. Implement Sci Commun. 2021;2(1):45. doi:1186/s43058-021-00147-4
  14. Nilsen P, Bernhardsson S. Context matters in implementation science: a scoping review of determinant frameworks that describe contextual determinants for implementation outcomes. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019;19(1):189. doi:1186/s12913-019-4015-3
  15. Piat M, Wainwright M, Sofouli E et al. The CFIR Card Game: a new approach for working with implementation teams to identify challenges and strategies. Implement Sci Commun. 2021;2(1):1. doi:1186/s43058-020-00099-1
Volume 11, Issue 10
October 2022
Pages 2365-2367
  • Receive Date: 29 October 2021
  • Revise Date: 22 August 2022
  • Accept Date: 27 August 2022
  • First Publish Date: 28 August 2022