ArticleImplementation science : IS2011
Opinion leaders and changes over time: a survey.
Article in Implementation science : IS, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- A qualitative systematic review of studies using the normalization process theory to research implementation processes.Implementation science : IS · 2014Pooled it
- Trial
- Gathering opinion leader data for a tailored implementation intervention in secondary healthcare: a randomised trial.BMC medical research methodology · 2014Trial
- A 4D Theoretical Framework for Measuring Topic-Specific Influence on Twitter: Development and Usability Study on Dietary Sodium Tweets.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Keeping up with evidence-based recommendations - a qualitative interview study with general practitioners in Germany on information-seeking behaviour in cardiovascular care.BMC primary care · 2023Article
- Organizational readiness to implement task-strengthening strategy for hypertension management among people living with HIV in Nigeria.Implementation science communications · 2023Article
- Opinion seeking behaviour of healthcare providers in ambulatory cardiovascular care in Germany: a cross-sectional study.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Using a Collaborative, Virtual Discussion Platform to Mobilize Oncologic Expertise for the COVID-19 Pandemic.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2020Article
- Information exchange networks of health care providers and evidence-based cardiovascular risk management: an observational study.Implementation science : IS · 2017Observational
- Learning from doing: the case for combining normalisation process theory and participatory learning and action research methodology for primary healthcare implementation research.BMC health services research · 2016Article
- Facilitating large-scale implementation of evidence based health care: insider accounts from a co-operative inquiry.BMC health services research · 2015Article
- Development and verification of an agent-based model of opinion leadership.Implementation science : IS · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOpinion leaders represent one way to disseminate new knowledge and influence the practice behaviors of physicians. This study explored the stability of opinion leaders over time, whether opinion leaders were polymorphic (i.e., influencing multiple practice areas) or monomorphic (i.e., influencing one practice area), and reach of opinion leaders in their local network.
methodsWe surveyed surgeons and pathologists in Ontario to identify opinion leaders for colorectal cancer in 2003 and 2005 and to identify opinion leaders for breast cancer in 2005. We explored whether opinion leaders for colorectal cancer identified in 2003 were re-identified in 2005. We examined whether opinion leaders were considered polymorphic (nominated in 2005 as opinion leaders for both colorectal and breast cancer) or monomorphic (nominated in 2005 for only one condition). Social-network mapping was used to identify the number of local colleagues identifying opinion leaders.
resultsResponse rates for surgeons were 41% (2003) and 40% (2005); response rates for pathologists were 42% (2003) and 37% (2005). Four (25%) of the surgical opinion leaders identified in 2003 for colorectal cancer were re-identified in 2005. No pathology opinion leaders for colorectal cancer were identified in both 2003 and 2005. Only 29% of surgical opinion leaders and 17% of pathology opinion leaders identified in the 2005 survey were considered influential for both colorectal cancer and breast cancer. Social-network mapping revealed that only a limited number of general surgeons (12%) or pathologists (7%) were connected to the social networks of identified opinion leaders.
conclusionsOpinion leaders identified in this study were not stable over a two-year time period and generally appear to be monomorphic, with clearly demarcated areas of expertise and limited spheres of influence. These findings may limit the practicability of routinely using opinion leaders to influence practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.