ArticleImplementation science : IS2012
Does the world need a scientific society for research on how to improve healthcare?
Article in Implementation science : IS, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bridging the Silos: A Comparative Analysis of Implementation Science and Improvement Science.Frontiers in health services · 2021Pooled it
- Tailored interventions to address determinants of practice.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Knowledge translation in health: how implementation science could contribute more.BMC medicine · 2019Article
- Policies, guideline implementation and practice change - how can the process be understood?Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences · 2017Article
- Findings from a novel approach to publication guideline revision: user road testing of a draft version of SQUIRE 2.0.BMJ quality & safety · 2016Article
- Implementation of improvement strategies in palliative care: an integrative review.Implementation science : IS · 2015Review
- A refined compilation of implementation strategies: results from the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) project.Implementation science : IS · 2015Article
- Improvement research priorities: USA survey and expert consensus.Nursing research and practice · 2013Article
- Adopting best practices from team science in a healthcare improvement research network: the impact on dissemination and implementation.Nursing research and practice · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this editorial, we reflect on the arguments for starting a scientific society focused on research on how to improve healthcare. This society would take an inclusive approach to what constitutes healthcare. For instance, it should include mental health healthcare, treatment for substance abuse, the work of allied health professions, and preventive healthcare. The society would be open to researchers from all traditions. Thus, we take an inclusive approach to what constitutes scientific research, as long as it uses rigorous methods, is focused on improving healthcare, and aims at knowledge that can be transferred across settings. The society would primarily target scientific researchers but would invite others with an interest in this area of research, regardless of their discipline, position, field of application, or group affiliation (e.g., improvement science, behavioral medicine, knowledge translation). A society would need fruitful collaboration with related societies and organizations, which may include having combined meetings. Special links may be developed with one or more journals. A website to provide information on relevant resources, events, and training opportunities is another key activity. It would also provide a voice for the field at funding agencies, political arenas, and similar institutions. An organizational structure and financial resources are required to develop and run these activities. Our aim is to start an international debate, to discover if we can establish a shared vision across academics and stakeholders engaged with creating scientific knowledge on how to improve healthcare. We invite readers to express their views in the online questionnaire accessed by following the URL link provided at the end of the editorial.
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.