Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15819991›Full record

SynthesisNutrition journal2005

Diffusion and dissemination of evidence-based dietary strategies for the prevention of cancer.

Donna Ciliska, Paula Robinson, Tanya Armour, Peter Ellis, Melissa Brouwers, Mary Gauld, Fulvia Baldassarre, Parminder Raina

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Nutrition journal, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

8 authors.

Donna CiliskaSchool of Nursing, McMaster University, 1200 Main St. W. Hamilton, Ontario, L8N 3Z5, Canada. ciliska@mcmaster.ca
Paula Robinson
Tanya Armour
Peter Ellis
Melissa Brouwers
Mary Gauld
Fulvia Baldassarre
Parminder Raina

Funding

PHS HHS 290-97-0017
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe purpose was to determine what strategies have been evaluated to disseminate cancer control interventions that promote the uptake of adult healthy diet?

methodsA systematic review was conducted. Studies were identified by searching MEDLINE, PREMEDLINE, Cancer LIT, EMBASE/Excerpta Medica, PsycINFO, CINAHL, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and reference lists and by contacting technical experts. English-language primary studies were selected if they evaluated the dissemination of healthy diet interventions in individuals, healthcare providers, or institutions. Studies of children or adolescents only were excluded.

resultsOne hundred one articles were retrieved for full text screening. Nine reports of seven distinct studies were included; four were randomized trials, one was a cohort design and three were descriptive studies. Six studies were rated as methodologically weak, and one was rated as moderate. Studies were not meta-analyzed because of heterogeneity, low methodological quality, and incomplete data reporting. No beneficial dissemination strategies were found except one that looks promising, the use of peer educators in the worksite, which led to a short-term increase in fruit and vegetable intake. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Overall, the quality of the evidence is not strong and is primarily descriptive rather than evaluative. No clear conclusions can be drawn from these data. Controlled studies are needed to evaluate dissemination strategies, and to compare dissemination and diffusion strategies with different messages and different target audiences.

Indexed as

DietEvidence-Based MedicineInformation DisseminationCongresses as TopicHealth PersonnelHealth PromotionHumansInformation Storage and RetrievalMass MediaMEDLINENational Institutes of Health (U.S.)NeoplasmsNutritional SciencesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTeachingUnited States

Identifiers

PMID15819991
PMCPMC1087879

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.