Successfully designing and implementing a program is complex; it requires a reflexive balance between the available resources and the priorities of various stakeholders, both of which change over time. Logic models are theory-based evaluation approaches used to identify and address key challenges of a program. This article describes the process of building a logic model on advanced theories in complexity studies. The models aim to support a province-wide multispecies monitoring system of antimicrobial use (AMU), designed in collaboration with the animal health sector in Quebec (Canada). Based on a rigorous theoretical foundation, the logic model is built in three steps: (1) mapping, a narrative review of literature on similar programs in other jurisdictions; (2) framing, iterative consultations with project members to elaborate the logic model; (3) shaping, hypotheses based on the logic model. The model emerges from the reflexive balancing of current scientific knowledge and empirical insights to gather relevant information about stakeholders from interdisciplinary experts that led a 3-year consensus-building process within the community. Recognizing the challenge of unpacking theories for practical use, we illustrate how the process of an \"open\" logic model building could enable governance coordination in complex processes. Logic models are useful for evaluating public, private, and academic partnerships in One Health programs that characterize an adaptive governance process.

BACKGROUND: Implementation science frameworks explore, interpret, and evaluate different components of the implementation process. By using a program logic approach, implementation frameworks with different purposes can be combined to detail complex interactions. The Implementation Research Logic Model (IRLM) facilitates the development of causal pathways and mechanisms that enable implementation. Critical elements of the IRLM vary across different study designs, and its applicability to synthesizing findings across settings is also under-explored. The dual purpose of this study is to develop an IRLM from an implementation research study that used case study methodology and to demonstrate the utility of the IRLM to synthesize findings across case sites.
METHODS: The method used in the exemplar project and the alignment of the IRLM to case study methodology are described. Cases were purposely selected using replication logic and represent organizations that have embedded exercise in routine care for people with cancer or mental illness. Four data sources were selected: semi-structured interviews with purposely selected staff, organizational document review, observations, and a survey using the Program Sustainability Assessment Tool (PSAT). Framework analysis was used, and an IRLM was produced at each case site. Similar elements within the individual IRLM were identified, extracted, and re-produced to synthesize findings across sites and represent the generalized, cross-case findings.
RESULTS: The IRLM was embedded within multiple stages of the study, including data collection, analysis, and reporting transparency. Between 33-44 determinants and 36-44 implementation strategies were identified at sites that informed individual IRLMs. An example of generalized findings describing \"intervention adaptability\" demonstrated similarities in determinant detail and mechanisms of implementation strategies across sites. However, different strategies were applied to address similar determinants. Dependent and bi-directional relationships operated along the causal pathway that influenced implementation outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: Case study methods help address implementation research priorities, including developing causal pathways and mechanisms. Embedding the IRLM within the case study approach provided structure and added to the transparency and replicability of the study. Identifying the similar elements across sites helped synthesize findings and give a general explanation of the implementation process. Detailing the methods provides an example for replication that can build generalizable knowledge in implementation research.

BACKGROUND: Tuberculosis case-finding interventions often involve several activities to enhance patient pathways, and it is unclear which activity defines the type of case-finding intervention. When conducting studies to identify the most effective case-finding intervention it is important to have a clear understanding of these interventions for meaningful comparisons. This review aimed to construct a systems-based logic model of all pathways to tuberculosis case detection through a synthesis of intervention designs.
METHODS: We identified an existing systematic review on the effectiveness of interventions to increase tuberculosis case detection and updated the search from December 2016 to October 2020. We included randomized controlled trials, as these designs encourage detailed description of interventions. Taking each study in turn, intervention descriptions were read in detail. The texts were analysed qualitatively by constantly comparing emerging codes to construct patient journeys, visualized as logical chains. Actions taken as part of interventions were positioned along patient journeys to theorize the sequence of outcomes. Patient journeys formed the basis of the model, which was refined through discussion.
RESULTS: Based on intervention descriptions from 17 randomized controlled trials, our model distinguishes two care-seeking pathways and four screening pathways. An open invitation to people with tuberculosis symptoms creates care-seeking pathways. On care-seeking pathways, systematic screening can be conducted at general health services, but not at specific TB care services. People invited to tuberculosis services regardless of symptoms follow tuberculosis screening pathways and may be identified with presumptive tuberculosis even if they do not seek care for tuberculosis symptoms. Tuberculosis screening pathways include screening offered to all people accessing care at general health services, screening at a mobile clinic or health facility with open invitation to a whole population or tuberculosis contacts, screening personally offered to a whole population or tuberculosis contacts at home, work or school, and screening offered to people receiving care for human immunodeficiency virus or other clinical risk-group care.
CONCLUSIONS: This systems-based logic model of tuberculosis case-finding pathways may support standardized terminology, consistency, transparency and improved communication among researchers, policy-makers, health workers and community members when implementing and evaluating interventions to improve tuberculosis case detection.

Global health disasters are on the rise and can occur at any time with little advance warning, necessitating preparation. The authors created a comprehensive evidence-based Emergency Preparedness Training Program focused on long-term retention and sustained learner engagement.
A prospective observational study was conducted of a simulation-based mass casualty event training program designed using an outcomes-based logic model. A total of 25 frontline healthcare workers from multiple hospital sites in the New York metropolitan area participated in an 8-hour immersive workshop. Data was collected from assessments, and surveys provided to participants 3 weeks prior to the workshop, immediately following the workshop, and 3 months after completion of the workshop.
The mean percentage of total knowledge scores improved across pre-workshop, post-workshop and retention (3 months post-workshop) assessments (53.2% vs. 64.8% vs. 67.6%, P < 0.05). Average comfort scores in the core MCI competencies increased across pre-workshop, post-workshop and retention self-assessments (P < 0.01). Of the participants assessed at 3 months retention (n = 14, 56%), 50.0% (n = 7) assisted in updating their hospital\'s emergency operations plan and 50.0% (n = 7) pursued further self-directed learning in disaster preparedness medicine.
The use of the logic model provided a transparent framework for the design, implementation, and evaluation of a competency-based EPT program at a single academic center.