Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16790824›Full record

GuidelineJournal of epidemiology and community health2006

A guide and glossary on post-positivist theory building for population health.

R M Carpiano, Dorothy M Daley

Abstract readGuideline
In one paragraph

Guideline in Journal of epidemiology and community health, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. A general framework for fidelity assessment.Frontiers in health services · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Is implementation science a science? Not yet.Frontiers in public health · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Repeated measures of implementation variables.Frontiers in health services · 2023
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

R M CarpianoDepartment of Anthropology and Sociology, University of British Columbia, 6303 NW Marine Drive, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada V6T 1Z1. carpiano@interchange.ubc.ca
Dorothy M Daley

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This guide and glossary focuses on the role of theory and conceptual models within population health research. Upon discussing the critical need for theory in conducting interdisciplinary research, it provides strategies for crafting theories that can be empirically tested and a glossary of theory building terms that are useful for guiding research. In addition to general concepts, the glossary includes some terminology commonly found in the social sciences, whose well established traditions and practices of formal theory building may be particularly informative for epidemiologists and other population health researchers who have minimal formal social science training, but study social factors in their research.

Indexed as

Models, TheoreticalPublic HealthTerminology as TopicEmpirical ResearchEpidemiologic Research DesignHealth Services ResearchHumansResearch DesignSocial Sciences

Identifiers

PMID16790824
PMCPMC2566228

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.