Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 26, 2026

The Participant-Reported Implementation Update and Score PRIUS: A Novel Method for Capturing Implementation-Related Data Over Time
Published on: February 19, 2021
Comparing theory-driven and intuition-based approaches to inform implementation strategies in practice: an
Julia Steinberg1, Priscilla Chan2, Sarsha Yap1
1The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Introduction:
To explicitly assess the impact of theory in implementation strategies, it is essential to isolate theoretical components while controlling other variables.
Aim:
This exploratory two-arm cluster-randomized implementation trial compared theory-driven versus intuition-based approaches to the development of strategies to improve risk-appropriate tumor testing and referral to genetics services for Lynch syndrome (LS), a hereditary cancer predisposition condition.
Methods:
Seven major Australian hospitals received an identical, seven-step implementation approach, with the only difference being either the use of theory-driven or intuition-based implementation strategy development, which was randomly assigned (theory n = 4; intuition n = 3). The theory-driven approach was guided by the Theoretical Domains Framework (step 4) and matched Behavior Change Techniques (step 5), with all other steps identical between both trial arms. The primary outcome was the rate of risk-appropriate LS tumor testing and referral within 2 months of colorectal cancer (CRC) resection, using data from January 1, 2017 to September 30, 2021 (n = 3,321 patients). Secondary outcomes included the proportion of risk-appropriate patients with a genetic referral.
Results:
The theory-driven arm showed a modest but non-significant improvement in the primary outcome of risk-appropriate LS pathway completion (adjusted risk ratio [aRR]=1.22, 95% CI: 0.92- 1.61, p = 0.1713); however, this was driven by one large hospital, with null effect when excluding that hospital (aRR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.86-1.18, p = 0.9639) and heterogeneous results across different hospitals. For patients with high LS risk tumor test results, the theory-driven arm showed a significantly lower proportion without a genetics referral (secondary outcome: aRR = 0.50, 95% CI: 0.41-0.61, p < 0.0001).
Conclusion:
Theory-driven implementation led to stronger improvements in a secondary outcome. Primary outcome evidence was inconclusive. While theory-driven approaches led to some improvements in a secondary outcome, there was no conclusive difference in the primary outcome. A published process evaluation reports on the contextual factors influencing results at each site, as well as theoretical alignment of intuitive strategies and their proposed mechanisms of action. This trial design offers a template for isolating and evaluating the contribution of theory to implementation strategies.
Trial Registration:
Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12618001072202. Registered June 27, 2018 https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=375348&isReview=true.
Spanish Abstract:
http://links.lww.com/IJEBH/A491.
Related Concept Videos
Randomized Experiments
Simple randomization
Simple...
Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Completely Randomized and Randomized Block Designs
Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Repeated Measures, Cross-Over, Carry-Over, and Latin Square Designs
Blinding
Nursing Interventions II: Selecting and Classifying the Nursing Interventions
Study Designs in Epidemiology
Observational studies are those where the researcher does not intervene but rather observes natural variations. They include cross-sectional, cohort, and...

