Scoring Process of the RE-AIM Framework
We used a previously established guideline tool to
evaluate the included studies with the each component of
the RE-AIM framework (RE-AIM, 2015). Two authors (M.J.
and A.C.) coded and scored each article independently using
a data abstraction sheet including a series of yes or no
questions to identify indicators within each of the five
RE-AIM dimensions, and then compared their results for
each article (Allen et al., 2011; VirginiaTech College of
Agriculture and Science, 2014b, 2014a). Discrepancies in the
two results were resolved by discussion of the reasons for
their individual coding and re-review of the article to check
the elements for the discrepant coding. After coding the
individual indicators of each dimension, we calculated a
score based on number of indicators of each dimension and
converted this into a percentage of each dimension for
individual studies. Finally, we calculated an average
percentage of each dimension across studies to provide a
comparable summary score across studies (Table 1).
Results
A total of 473 articles were identified through database
searching and 5 articles were identified through additional
searching. After removing duplicate articles, 383 articles