The PARiHS framework is a conceptual and practical tool for implementing evidence into practice. It is based on the idea that successful implementation (SI) is a function of evidence (E), context (C), and facilitation (F), represented as SI = f(E, C, F). The framework has been developed and refined over time, and is currently in its third phase. It is a three-dimensional framework that allows for the interpretation of successful implementation, arguing that elements can be located on a continuum of "high" to "low" evidence and context. The framework has been used by researchers and practitioners to guide their work in knowledge translation. However, there are challenges in using the framework, including the need to clarify the differences between conceptual frameworks, theories, and models. The paper discusses these issues and proposes a typology derived from social policy analysis to distinguish between these terms. The paper also presents a hypothesis that the PARiHS framework could be applied as a two-stage process: as a preliminary (diagnostic and evaluative) measure of the elements and sub-elements of evidence and context, and then using the aggregated data from these measures to determine the most appropriate facilitation method. The exact nature of the intervention is thus determined by the specific actors in the specific context at a specific time and place. The paper concludes by suggesting that the future direction of the work on the PARiHS framework is to develop a two-stage diagnostic and evaluative approach, where the intervention is shaped and moulded by the information gathered about the specific situation and from participating stakeholders. To expedite the generation of new evidence and testing of emerging theories, the paper suggests the formation of an international research implementation science collaborative that can systematically collect and analyse experiences of using and testing the PARiHS framework and similar conceptual and theoretical approaches. The paper also recommends further refinement of the definitions around conceptual framework, theory, and model, suggesting a wider discussion that embraces multiple epistemological and ontological perspectives. The PARiHS framework is seen as a practical and pragmatic tool by practitioners and researchers at the local level, and it has the potential to be used as a diagnostic and evaluative tool to successfully implement evidence into practice.The PARiHS framework is a conceptual and practical tool for implementing evidence into practice. It is based on the idea that successful implementation (SI) is a function of evidence (E), context (C), and facilitation (F), represented as SI = f(E, C, F). The framework has been developed and refined over time, and is currently in its third phase. It is a three-dimensional framework that allows for the interpretation of successful implementation, arguing that elements can be located on a continuum of "high" to "low" evidence and context. The framework has been used by researchers and practitioners to guide their work in knowledge translation. However, there are challenges in using the framework, including the need to clarify the differences between conceptual frameworks, theories, and models. The paper discusses these issues and proposes a typology derived from social policy analysis to distinguish between these terms. The paper also presents a hypothesis that the PARiHS framework could be applied as a two-stage process: as a preliminary (diagnostic and evaluative) measure of the elements and sub-elements of evidence and context, and then using the aggregated data from these measures to determine the most appropriate facilitation method. The exact nature of the intervention is thus determined by the specific actors in the specific context at a specific time and place. The paper concludes by suggesting that the future direction of the work on the PARiHS framework is to develop a two-stage diagnostic and evaluative approach, where the intervention is shaped and moulded by the information gathered about the specific situation and from participating stakeholders. To expedite the generation of new evidence and testing of emerging theories, the paper suggests the formation of an international research implementation science collaborative that can systematically collect and analyse experiences of using and testing the PARiHS framework and similar conceptual and theoretical approaches. The paper also recommends further refinement of the definitions around conceptual framework, theory, and model, suggesting a wider discussion that embraces multiple epistemological and ontological perspectives. The PARiHS framework is seen as a practical and pragmatic tool by practitioners and researchers at the local level, and it has the potential to be used as a diagnostic and evaluative tool to successfully implement evidence into practice.