Development of a method for qualitative data integration to advance implementation science within research consortia

on behalf of the IMPACT Consortium

doi:10.1186/s43058-025-00701-4

Development of a method for qualitative data integration to advance implementation science within research consortia

on behalf of the IMPACT Consortium

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

Background: Methods of integrating qualitative data across diverse studies and within multi-site research consortia are less developed than those for integrating quantitative data. The development ofsuchmethods is essential to support the data exchange needed for cross-study qualitative inquiry and given the increasing emphasis on data sharing and open science. We describe methods for qualitative data integration within the National Cancer Institute’s Improving the Management of symPtoms During And following Cancer Treatment (IMPACT) Consortium funded by the Cancer Moonshot^SM. Data collection and analysis were guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Our case study highlights potential solutions for unique challenges faced when integrating qualitative data across multiple settings in a research consortium. Methods: The IMPACT consortium is comprised of three research centers (RCs) each conducting pragmatic trials examining the effectiveness of routine symptom management on patient-centered outcomes. After reaching consensus on use of CFIR as the common implementation determinant framework, RCs developed a semi-structured interview guide and tailored it to features of their healthcare setting and symptom management interventions. RCs conducted interviews/focus groups with healthcare system partners to examine contextual factors impacting implementation. RCs exchanged 1–2 transcripts (n = 5 total) for purposes of pilot testing the methodology. Results: Given the heterogeneity of study settings and contexts, it was challenging to simultaneously assign codes at both domain and construct levels and the process was resource intensive. Recommendations include employing a common framework for data collection and analyses from the outset, coding at domain level first and then incorporating construct codes, and centralizing processes via a coordinating center (or similar entity) and combining coded transcripts using qualitative software. We also generated an iteratively refined codebook that employed the CFIR schema and incorporated CFIR 2.0 to provide detailed guidance for coders conducting cross-study qualitative inquiry. Conclusions: Limited guidance exists on how to support qualitative data integration, data exchange, and sharing across multiple studies. This paper describes a systematic method for employing an implementation determinant framework-guided approach to foster data integration. This methodology can be adopted by other research consortia to support qualitative data integration, cross-site qualitative inquiry, and generate improved understanding of evidence-based intervention implementation.

Original language	English (US)
Article number	21
Journal	Implementation Science Communications
Volume	6
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-025-00701-4
State	Published - Dec 2025

Funding

The opinions and views expressed by the authors are their own, the content is solely the responsibility of the authors, and this material should not be interpreted as representing the official viewpoint of the US Department of Health and Human Services, the National Institutes of Health, or the National Cancer Institute. IMPACT Consortium group authorship: David Cella, PhD (Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL); Andrea Cheville, MD, MSCE (Mayo Clinic, Rochester MN); Michael J. Hassett, MD, MPH (Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA); Raymond U. Osarogiagbon, MBBS, FACP (Baptist Memorial Hospital, Memphis, TN); Deborah Schrag, MD, MPH (Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Institute, New York, NY); Sandra L. Wong, MD (Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH); Barbara L. Kroner, PhD, MPH (RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC); Ashley Wilder Smith, PhD, MPH (National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD); Lisa DiMartino, PhD, MPH (Peter O'Donnell Jr. School of Public Health, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA); Sofia Garcia, PhD (Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL); Joan Griffin, PhD (Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN); Roxanne Jensen, PhD (National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD); Sandra Mitchell, PhD, CRNP (National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD); Kathryn Ruddy, MD, MPH (Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN); Justin D. Smith, PhD (University of Utah Spencer Fox Eccles School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT); Betina Yanez, PhD (Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL); Jessica J. Bian, MD (Maine Medical Center, Portland, ME); Don S. Dizon, MD, FACP (Lifespan Cancer Institute, Providence, RI); Hannah W. Hazard-Jenkins, MD, FACS (West Virginia University Cancer Institute, Morgantown, WV); Mary-Anne Ardini (RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC); Paige Ahrens, MS (Maine Medical Center, Portland, ME); Jessica Austin, PhD (Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ); Fiona Barrett (Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA); Michael Bass, MS (Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL); Megan Begnoche, RN, MSN (Lifespan Cancer Institute, Providence, RI); September Cahue, MPH (Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL); Kimberly Caron, RN, BSN, CCRC (Maine Medical Center, Portland, ME); Linda Chlan, PhD, RN (Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN); Ava Coughlin, MAEd (Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL); Christine Cronin (Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA); Samira Dias, MPH (Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA); Nicolas Faris, MDiv (Baptist Memorial Hospital, Memphis, TN); Anne Marie Flores, PhD, PT (Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL); Martha Garcia (Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL); Karla Hemming, PhD (University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK); Jeph Herrin, PhD, MS (Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT); Christine Hodgdon, MS (Guiding Researchers and Advocates to Scientific Partnerships, Baltimore, MD); Sheetal Kircher, MD (Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL); Kurt Kroenke, MD, MAC (Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN); Veronica Lam (Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN); Nicola Lancki, MPH (Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL); Quan H. Mai, MS (Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL); Jennifer Mallow, PhD, FNP-BC (West Virginia University Cancer Institute, Morgantown, WV); Nadine J. McCleary, MD, MPH (Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA); Wynne Norton, PhD (National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD); Mary O\u2019Connor, MS (Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL); Deirdre Pachman, MD (Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN); Loretta Pearson, MPhil, CCRC (Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH); Frank Penedo, PhD (University of Miami, Miami, FL); Jewel Podratz, MBA (Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN); Jennifer Popovic, DVM, MA (RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC); Liliana Preiss, MSE (RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC); Parvez Rahman, MHI (Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN); Sarah Redmond, PhD, MA (Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN); James Reich, PMP (Maine Medical Center, Portland, ME); Joshua Richardson, PhD (RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC); Kimberly Richardson, MA (Black Cancer Collaborative, Chicago, IL); Jennifer Ridgeway, PhD (Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN); Lila Rutten, PhD (Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN); Karen Schaepe, PhD (Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN) Denise Scholtens, PhD (Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL); Tiana Poirier-Shelton, MPH (Baptist Memorial Hospital, Memphis, TN); Philip Silberman, MA (Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL); Jaclyn Simpson, MBA (Baptist Memorial Hospital, Memphis, TN); Laura Tasker, BS, RT(N) (West Virginia University Cancer Institute, Morgantown, WV); Nathan Tesch, MS (Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN); Cindy Tofthagen, PhD (Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL); Angela Tramontano, MPH (Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA); Benjamin D. Tyndall, PhD (RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC); Hajime Uno, PhD (Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA); Firas Wehbe, MD, PhD (Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL); and Bryan Weiner, PhD, MA (University of Washington, Seattle, WA). Inquiries about the IMPACT consortium can be sent to [email protected]. The Improving the Management of symPtoms during And following Cancer Treatment (IMPACT) Consortium is supported by funding provided through the Cancer Moonshot. Research reported in this publication was funded by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health under Award Numbers UM1CA233033 (Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN), UM1CA233035 (Northwestern University, Chicago, IL), UM1CA233080 (Baptist Health System, Memphis TN, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center Lebanon, NH, Lifespan Health System Providence RI, Maine Medical Center Portland ME, and West Virginia University, Morgantown WV), and U24CA232980 (RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC).

Keywords

Cancer
Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research
Data integration
Implementation science
Qualitative methods

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Health Policy
Health Informatics
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1186/s43058-025-00701-4

Cite this

@article{3caf69f9c68d415d8e4e3a9d1b3e3693,

title = "Development of a method for qualitative data integration to advance implementation science within research consortia",

abstract = "Background: Methods of integrating qualitative data across diverse studies and within multi-site research consortia are less developed than those for integrating quantitative data. The development ofsuchmethods is essential to support the data exchange needed for cross-study qualitative inquiry and given the increasing emphasis on data sharing and open science. We describe methods for qualitative data integration within the National Cancer Institute{\textquoteright}s Improving the Management of symPtoms During And following Cancer Treatment (IMPACT) Consortium funded by the Cancer MoonshotSM. Data collection and analysis were guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Our case study highlights potential solutions for unique challenges faced when integrating qualitative data across multiple settings in a research consortium. Methods: The IMPACT consortium is comprised of three research centers (RCs) each conducting pragmatic trials examining the effectiveness of routine symptom management on patient-centered outcomes. After reaching consensus on use of CFIR as the common implementation determinant framework, RCs developed a semi-structured interview guide and tailored it to features of their healthcare setting and symptom management interventions. RCs conducted interviews/focus groups with healthcare system partners to examine contextual factors impacting implementation. RCs exchanged 1–2 transcripts (n = 5 total) for purposes of pilot testing the methodology. Results: Given the heterogeneity of study settings and contexts, it was challenging to simultaneously assign codes at both domain and construct levels and the process was resource intensive. Recommendations include employing a common framework for data collection and analyses from the outset, coding at domain level first and then incorporating construct codes, and centralizing processes via a coordinating center (or similar entity) and combining coded transcripts using qualitative software. We also generated an iteratively refined codebook that employed the CFIR schema and incorporated CFIR 2.0 to provide detailed guidance for coders conducting cross-study qualitative inquiry. Conclusions: Limited guidance exists on how to support qualitative data integration, data exchange, and sharing across multiple studies. This paper describes a systematic method for employing an implementation determinant framework-guided approach to foster data integration. This methodology can be adopted by other research consortia to support qualitative data integration, cross-site qualitative inquiry, and generate improved understanding of evidence-based intervention implementation.",

keywords = "Cancer, Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, Data integration, Implementation science, Qualitative methods",

author = "{on behalf of the IMPACT Consortium} and Lisa DiMartino and Carroll, {Allison J.} and Ridgeway, {Jennifer L.} and Anna Revette and Griffin, {Joan M.} and Weiner, {Bryan J.} and Mitchell, {Sandra A.} and Norton, {Wynne E.} and Christine Cronin and Cheville, {Andrea L.} and Flores, {Ann Marie} and Smith, {Justin Dean} and Wehbe, {Firas Hazem} and Hajime Uno and Tyndall, {Benjamin D.} and Angela Tramontano and Cindy Tofthagen and Nathan Tesch and Laura Tasker and Jaclyn Simpson and Philip Silberman and Tiana Poirier-Shelton and Denise Scholtens and Karen Schaepe and Lila Rutten and Kimberly Richardson and Joshua Richardson and James Reich and Sarah Redmond and Parvez Rahman and Liliana Preiss and Jennifer Popovic and Jewel Podratz and Francisco Penedo and Loretta Pearson and Deirdre Pachman and Mary O{\textquoteright}Connor and McCleary, {Nadine J.} and Jennifer Mallow and Mai, {Quan H.} and Nicola Lancki and Veronica Lam and Kurt Kroenke and Sheetal Kircher and Christine Hodgdon and Jeph Herrin and Michael Bass and Betina Yanez and Sofia Garcia and David Cella",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} The Authors 2025.",

year = "2025",

month = dec,

doi = "10.1186/s43058-025-00701-4",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "6",

journal = "Implementation Science Communications",

issn = "2662-2211",

publisher = "BioMed Central",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Development of a method for qualitative data integration to advance implementation science within research consortia

AU - on behalf of the IMPACT Consortium

AU - DiMartino, Lisa

AU - Carroll, Allison J.

AU - Ridgeway, Jennifer L.

AU - Revette, Anna

AU - Griffin, Joan M.

AU - Weiner, Bryan J.

AU - Mitchell, Sandra A.

AU - Norton, Wynne E.

AU - Cronin, Christine

AU - Cheville, Andrea L.

AU - Flores, Ann Marie

AU - Smith, Justin Dean

AU - Wehbe, Firas Hazem

AU - Uno, Hajime

AU - Tyndall, Benjamin D.

AU - Tramontano, Angela

AU - Tofthagen, Cindy

AU - Tesch, Nathan

AU - Tasker, Laura

AU - Simpson, Jaclyn

AU - Silberman, Philip

AU - Poirier-Shelton, Tiana

AU - Scholtens, Denise

AU - Schaepe, Karen

AU - Rutten, Lila

AU - Richardson, Kimberly

AU - Richardson, Joshua

AU - Reich, James

AU - Redmond, Sarah

AU - Rahman, Parvez

AU - Preiss, Liliana

AU - Popovic, Jennifer

AU - Podratz, Jewel

AU - Penedo, Francisco

AU - Pearson, Loretta

AU - Pachman, Deirdre

AU - O’Connor, Mary

AU - McCleary, Nadine J.

AU - Mallow, Jennifer

AU - Mai, Quan H.

AU - Lancki, Nicola

AU - Lam, Veronica

AU - Kroenke, Kurt

AU - Kircher, Sheetal

AU - Hodgdon, Christine

AU - Herrin, Jeph

AU - Bass, Michael

AU - Yanez, Betina

AU - Garcia, Sofia

AU - Cella, David

PY - 2025/12

Y1 - 2025/12

N2 - Background: Methods of integrating qualitative data across diverse studies and within multi-site research consortia are less developed than those for integrating quantitative data. The development ofsuchmethods is essential to support the data exchange needed for cross-study qualitative inquiry and given the increasing emphasis on data sharing and open science. We describe methods for qualitative data integration within the National Cancer Institute’s Improving the Management of symPtoms During And following Cancer Treatment (IMPACT) Consortium funded by the Cancer MoonshotSM. Data collection and analysis were guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Our case study highlights potential solutions for unique challenges faced when integrating qualitative data across multiple settings in a research consortium. Methods: The IMPACT consortium is comprised of three research centers (RCs) each conducting pragmatic trials examining the effectiveness of routine symptom management on patient-centered outcomes. After reaching consensus on use of CFIR as the common implementation determinant framework, RCs developed a semi-structured interview guide and tailored it to features of their healthcare setting and symptom management interventions. RCs conducted interviews/focus groups with healthcare system partners to examine contextual factors impacting implementation. RCs exchanged 1–2 transcripts (n = 5 total) for purposes of pilot testing the methodology. Results: Given the heterogeneity of study settings and contexts, it was challenging to simultaneously assign codes at both domain and construct levels and the process was resource intensive. Recommendations include employing a common framework for data collection and analyses from the outset, coding at domain level first and then incorporating construct codes, and centralizing processes via a coordinating center (or similar entity) and combining coded transcripts using qualitative software. We also generated an iteratively refined codebook that employed the CFIR schema and incorporated CFIR 2.0 to provide detailed guidance for coders conducting cross-study qualitative inquiry. Conclusions: Limited guidance exists on how to support qualitative data integration, data exchange, and sharing across multiple studies. This paper describes a systematic method for employing an implementation determinant framework-guided approach to foster data integration. This methodology can be adopted by other research consortia to support qualitative data integration, cross-site qualitative inquiry, and generate improved understanding of evidence-based intervention implementation.

AB - Background: Methods of integrating qualitative data across diverse studies and within multi-site research consortia are less developed than those for integrating quantitative data. The development ofsuchmethods is essential to support the data exchange needed for cross-study qualitative inquiry and given the increasing emphasis on data sharing and open science. We describe methods for qualitative data integration within the National Cancer Institute’s Improving the Management of symPtoms During And following Cancer Treatment (IMPACT) Consortium funded by the Cancer MoonshotSM. Data collection and analysis were guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Our case study highlights potential solutions for unique challenges faced when integrating qualitative data across multiple settings in a research consortium. Methods: The IMPACT consortium is comprised of three research centers (RCs) each conducting pragmatic trials examining the effectiveness of routine symptom management on patient-centered outcomes. After reaching consensus on use of CFIR as the common implementation determinant framework, RCs developed a semi-structured interview guide and tailored it to features of their healthcare setting and symptom management interventions. RCs conducted interviews/focus groups with healthcare system partners to examine contextual factors impacting implementation. RCs exchanged 1–2 transcripts (n = 5 total) for purposes of pilot testing the methodology. Results: Given the heterogeneity of study settings and contexts, it was challenging to simultaneously assign codes at both domain and construct levels and the process was resource intensive. Recommendations include employing a common framework for data collection and analyses from the outset, coding at domain level first and then incorporating construct codes, and centralizing processes via a coordinating center (or similar entity) and combining coded transcripts using qualitative software. We also generated an iteratively refined codebook that employed the CFIR schema and incorporated CFIR 2.0 to provide detailed guidance for coders conducting cross-study qualitative inquiry. Conclusions: Limited guidance exists on how to support qualitative data integration, data exchange, and sharing across multiple studies. This paper describes a systematic method for employing an implementation determinant framework-guided approach to foster data integration. This methodology can be adopted by other research consortia to support qualitative data integration, cross-site qualitative inquiry, and generate improved understanding of evidence-based intervention implementation.

KW - Cancer

KW - Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research

KW - Data integration

KW - Implementation science

KW - Qualitative methods

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=105000145987&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=105000145987&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1186/s43058-025-00701-4

DO - 10.1186/s43058-025-00701-4

M3 - Article

C2 - 40001223

AN - SCOPUS:105000145987

SN - 2662-2211

VL - 6

JO - Implementation Science Communications

JF - Implementation Science Communications

IS - 1

M1 - 21

ER -

Development of a method for qualitative data integration to advance implementation science within research consortia

Abstract

Funding

Keywords

ASJC Scopus subject areas

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this