Implementation Science

What we do

Clinical research continually produces new evidence that can benefit patients.  This evidence does not reliably find its way into everyday patient care.  In both policy and research, the selection of implementation strategies tend to be driven by combinations of habit, pragmatism and varied assumptions about how the world works rather than evidence.  We aim to inform policy by providing rigorous evidence on the cost-effectiveness of implementation strategies, and how and when they work best.

This work includes:

  • Measuring and understanding the uptake of evidence-based practice – involving  qualitative and quantitative studies to describe and explain the uptake of evidence-based practice.
  • Changing clinical and organisational practice - involving intervention studies to estimate the effects of implementation strategies and embedded process evaluations to explore causal mechanisms.


  • Action to Support Practices Implementing Research Evidence (ASPIRE).
  • Enhanced audit and feedback interventions to increase the uptake of evidence-based transfusion practice (AFFINITIE).
  • Audit and feedback to improve primary care prescribing.
  • Enhancing NAtional Clinical audiT and feedback (ENACT).

Who we are


Theme Lead
Professor Robbie Foy

View our team members

Related groups

Implementation science is a theme that sits within the Division of Primary Care, Palliative Care and Public Health, alongside the following other themes/units: