Evidence map›Paper›PMID 14683530›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2003

PRIME--PRocess modelling in ImpleMEntation research: selecting a theoretical basis for interventions to change clinical practice.

Anne E Walker, Jeremy Grimshaw, Marie Johnston, Nigel Pitts, Nick Steen, Martin Eccles

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

55 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Implementing and evaluating a project to enable and encourage Caribbean data-sharing.Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2024
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Minimizing Radiation-Why Aren't We Down to Zero?The Journal of innovations in cardiac rhythm management · 2018
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Anne E WalkerHealth Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK. anne_walker@yahoo.com
Jeremy Grimshaw
Marie Johnston
Nigel Pitts
Nick Steen
Martin Eccles

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBiomedical research constantly produces new findings but these are not routinely translated into health care practice. One way to address this problem is to develop effective interventions to translate research findings into practice. Currently a range of empirical interventions are available and systematic reviews of these have demonstrated that there is no single best intervention. This evidence base is difficult to use in routine settings because it cannot identify which intervention is most likely to be effective (or cost effective) in a particular situation. We need to establish a scientific rationale for interventions. As clinical practice is a form of human behaviour, theories of human behaviour that have proved useful in other similar settings may provide a basis for developing a scientific rationale for the choice of interventions to translate research findings into clinical practice. The objectives of the study are: to amplify and populate scientifically validated theories of behaviour with evidence from the experience of health professionals; to use this as a basis for developing predictive questionnaires using replicable methods; to identify which elements of the questionnaire (i.e., which theoretical constructs) predict clinical practice and distinguish between evidence compliant and non-compliant practice; and on the basis of these results, to identify variables (based on theoretical constructs) that might be prime targets for behaviour change interventions.

methodsWe will develop postal questionnaires measuring two motivational, three action and one stage theory to explore five behaviours with 800 general medical and 600 general dental practitioners. We will collect data on performance for each of the behaviours. The relationships between predictor variables (theoretical constructs) and outcome measures (data on performance) in each survey will be assessed using multiple regression analysis and structural equation modelling. In the final phase of the project, the findings from all surveys will be analysed simultaneously adopting a random effects approach to investigate whether the relationships between predictor variables and outcome measures are modified by behaviour, professional group or geographical location.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchEvidence-Based MedicinePractice Patterns, Physicians'Psychological TheoryDentistryDentistsDiffusion of InnovationGeographyGuideline AdherenceHealth Plan ImplementationHumansModels, PsychologicalMotivationPhysicians, FamilyRegression AnalysisState Medicine

Identifiers

PMID14683530
PMCPMC317340

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.