***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: Background It is increasingly acknowledged that ‘ acceptability ’ should be considered when design ing , evaluating and implementing healthcare interventions . However , the published literature offers little guidance on how to define or assess acceptability . The purpose of this study was to develop a multi-construct theoretical framework of acceptability of  healthcare interventions  that can be applied to assess prospect i ve ( i.e. anticipated ) and retrospective ( i.e. experienced ) acceptability from the perspective of intervention delivers and recipients . Methods Two methods were used to select the component constructs of acceptability . 1 ) An overview of review s was conducted to identify systematic review s that cl aim to define , theorise or measure acceptability of healthcare interventions . 2 ) Principles of inductive and deductive reasoning were applied to theorise the concept of acceptability and develop a theoretical framework . Steps included ( 1 ) defining acceptability ; ( 2 ) describing its properties and scope and ( 3 ) identifying component constructs and empirical indicators . Results From the 43 review s included in the overview , none explicitly theorised or defined acceptability . Measures used to assess acceptability focused on behaviour ( e.g. dropout rates ) ( 23 review s ) , affect ( i.e. feelings ) ( 5 review s ) , cognition ( i.e. perceptions ) ( 7 review s ) or a combination of these ( 8 review s).From the methods described above we propose a definition : Acceptability is a multi-faceted construct that reflects the extent to which people delivering or receiving a healthcare intervention consider it to be appropriate , based on anticipated or experienced cognitive and emotional responses to the intervention . The theoretical framework of acceptability ( TFA ) consists of seven component constructs : affective attitude , burden , perceived effectiveness , ethicality , intervention coherence , opportunity costs , and self-efficacy . Conclusion Despite frequent cl aims that healthcare interventions have assessed acceptability , it is evident that acceptability research could be more robust . The proposed definition of acceptability and the TFA can inform assessment tools and evaluations of the acceptability of new or existing interventions OBJECTIVE This study examines hospital motivations to acquire new medical technology , an issue of considerable policy relevance : in this case , whether , when , and why hospitals acquire a new capital-intensive medical technology ,  magnetic resonance imaging equipment ( MRI ) . STUDY DESIGN We review three common explanations for medical technology adoption : profit maximization , technological preeminence , and clinical excellence , and incorporate them into a composite model , controlling for regulatory differences , market structures , and organizational characteristics . All four models are then tested using Cox regressions . DATA SOURCES The study is based on an initial sample of 637 hospitals in the continental United States that owned or leased an MRI unit as of 31 December 1988 , plus nonadopters . Due to missing data the final sample consisted of 507 hospitals . The data , drawn from two telephone surveys , are supplemented by the AHA Survey , census data , and industry and academic sources . PRINCIPAL FINDING Statistically , the three individual models account for roughly comparable amounts of variance in past adoption behavior . On the basis of explanatory power and parsimony , however , the technology model is " best . " Although the composite model is statistically better than any of the individual models , it does not add much more explanatory power adjusting for the number of variables added . CONCLUSIONS The composite model identified the importance a hospital attached to being a technological leader , its clinical requirements , and the change in revenues it associated with the adoption of MRI as the major determinants of adoption behavior . We conclude that a hospital 's  adoption behavior is strongly linked to its strategic orientation Incomplete and inadequate reporting is an avoidable waste that reduces the usefulness of research . The CONSORT ( Consoli date d St and ards of Reporting Trials ) Statement is an evidence -based reporting guideline that aims to improve research transparency and reduce waste . In 2008 , the CONSORT Group developed an extension to the original statement that addressed method ological issues specific to trials of nonpharmacologic treatments ( NPTs ) , such as surgery , rehabilitation , or psychotherapy . This article describes an up date of that extension and presents an extension for reporting abstract s of NPT trials . To develop these material s , the authors review ed pertinent literature published up to July 2016 ; surveyed authors of NPT trials ; and conducted a consensus meeting with editors , trialists , and method ologists . Changes to the CONSORT Statement extension for NPT trials include wording modifications to improve readers ' underst and ing and the addition of 3 new items . These items address whether and how adherence of participants to interventions is assessed or enhanced , description of attempts to limit bias if blinding is not possible , and specification of the delay between r and omization and initiation of the intervention . The CONSORT extension for abstract s of NPT trials includes 2 new items that were not specified in the original CONSORT Statement for abstract s. The first addresses reporting of eligibility criteria for centers where the intervention is performed and for care providers . The second addresses reporting of important changes to the intervention versus what was planned . Both the up date d CONSORT extension for NPT trials and the CONSORT extension for NPT trial abstract s should help authors , editors , and peer review ers improve the transparency of NPT trial reports 
    Output:
    
Twenty-nine studies of interventions aim ed at improving clinician-patient communication in clinical setting s. We identified acceptability , adoption , appropriateness , feasibility , fidelity , implementation cost , intervention complexity , penetration , reach , and sustainability as factors that are feasible and appropriate to extract during an evidence synthesis project .
Abstract ing information about these factors may enhance the value of systematic review s and other evidence synthesis efforts , improving the dissemination and adoption of interventions that are effective , feasible , and sustainable across different context