This article summarizes models used in dissemination and implementation (D&I) research to help researchers select appropriate models for their studies. The authors reviewed 61 models, categorizing them based on construct flexibility, focus on dissemination and/or implementation activities, and the socio-ecological framework (SEF) level. Models were classified into five categories along the D/I continuum: D-only, D>I, D=I, I>D, and I-only. The SEF levels included system, community, organization, and individual. Models addressing policy activities were also noted. The review found that models vary in their flexibility and focus, with some being more general and others more specific. Models that are more operational provide detailed steps for D&I research, while broad models allow for greater flexibility but require more careful application. The study emphasizes the importance of using theories and frameworks in D&I research to enhance the effectiveness of interventions by focusing on essential processes of behavioral change. D&I research is interdisciplinary, drawing from fields such as agriculture, medicine, public health, organizational behavior, psychology, political science, and marketing. The field has grown significantly since its origins several decades ago, with many journals now dedicating special issues to D&I research. The review highlights the need to collect, organize, and synthesize models used to integrate evidence-based interventions into practice. The authors provide examples of how models have been used in D&I research, including case studies that illustrate the application of models in various settings. The review also discusses the importance of measuring constructs in model-informed studies, as measures are essential for operationalizing models and conducting D&I research. The authors note that many constructs are currently assessed as open-ended questions due to the lack of standard measures. The review concludes that the findings may help researchers better identify and select models for their D&I work. The authors emphasize the importance of using existing models to inform study design and execution, as well as the need for further research to develop and compile available measures. The study also highlights the importance of terminology consistency in D&I research and the need for future studies to address gaps in the field. The review suggests that future research should focus on whether models are designed to guide intervention development, evaluate interventions, or both, and explore less traditional methods such as dynamic simulation for implementation decision-making.This article summarizes models used in dissemination and implementation (D&I) research to help researchers select appropriate models for their studies. The authors reviewed 61 models, categorizing them based on construct flexibility, focus on dissemination and/or implementation activities, and the socio-ecological framework (SEF) level. Models were classified into five categories along the D/I continuum: D-only, D>I, D=I, I>D, and I-only. The SEF levels included system, community, organization, and individual. Models addressing policy activities were also noted. The review found that models vary in their flexibility and focus, with some being more general and others more specific. Models that are more operational provide detailed steps for D&I research, while broad models allow for greater flexibility but require more careful application. The study emphasizes the importance of using theories and frameworks in D&I research to enhance the effectiveness of interventions by focusing on essential processes of behavioral change. D&I research is interdisciplinary, drawing from fields such as agriculture, medicine, public health, organizational behavior, psychology, political science, and marketing. The field has grown significantly since its origins several decades ago, with many journals now dedicating special issues to D&I research. The review highlights the need to collect, organize, and synthesize models used to integrate evidence-based interventions into practice. The authors provide examples of how models have been used in D&I research, including case studies that illustrate the application of models in various settings. The review also discusses the importance of measuring constructs in model-informed studies, as measures are essential for operationalizing models and conducting D&I research. The authors note that many constructs are currently assessed as open-ended questions due to the lack of standard measures. The review concludes that the findings may help researchers better identify and select models for their D&I work. The authors emphasize the importance of using existing models to inform study design and execution, as well as the need for further research to develop and compile available measures. The study also highlights the importance of terminology consistency in D&I research and the need for future studies to address gaps in the field. The review suggests that future research should focus on whether models are designed to guide intervention development, evaluate interventions, or both, and explore less traditional methods such as dynamic simulation for implementation decision-making.