In a previous piece in the journal, Campione et al 1 advocated for oncology researchers and practitioners to use implementation science strategies to move evidence into practice, arguing that the oft-cited 17 years that it takes to move evidence into practice are too long. Key steps to accomplish this are as follows: (1) identifying clinical problems; (2) determining best evidence to address the clinical problem; (3) surveying the clinical environment to identify and address barriers to change and facilitators to implement new strategies; and (4) evaluating the effectiveness of the changed practice. Implementation science research can be challenging-after all, the variability among clinical practice is great.One piece in this current issue by Doubblestein et al 2 addresses step 3-identifying barriers and facilitators among clinicians to adopt standardized outcome measures for use among women treated for lymphedema. Outcome measures, critical to evaluate the effectiveness of treatment, play a role in ensuring that treatment is effective. These measures must be valid, reliable, and sensitive to change, but, additionally, outcome measures must be clinically feasible. One issue related to the use of outcome measures is the plethora of published measures. Work by the Oncology EDGE Task Force (EDGE = Evidence Database to Guide Effectiveness) sought to identify key outcome measures that met strong psychometric properties and are clinically feasible. 3 This task force work was intended to create a standardized list of measures for use by oncology clinicians. Reducing the number of available measures in order to create a standardized list is also important to be able to evaluate the findings of clinical studies, to identify ac-