ArticleBMJ open2012
Tracking the impact of research on policy and practice: investigating the feasibility of using citations in clinical guidelines for research evaluation.
Article in BMJ open, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quantifying the inclusion of cardiovascular research into clinical guidelines.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2026Article
- Evaluating the online impact of reporting guidelines for randomised trial reports and protocols: a cross-sectional web-based data analysis of CONSORT and SPIRIT initiatives.Scientometrics · 2023Article
- Introducing the EMPIRE Index: A novel, value-based metric framework to measure the impact of medical publications.PloS one · 2022Article
- Impact of investigator initiated trials and industry sponsored trials on medical practice (IMPACT): rationale and study design.BMC medical research methodology · 2020Article
- A characterization of professional media and its links to research.Scientometrics · 2019Article
- Understanding the contribution of UK public health research to clinical guidelines: a bibliometric analysis.F1000Research · 2019Article
- Does citation matter? Research citation in policy documents as an indicator of research impact - an Australian obesity policy case-study.Health research policy and systems · 2018Article
- Evaluation of Scientific Outputs of Kashan University of Medical Sciences in Scopus Citation Database based on Scopus, ResearchGate, and Mendeley Scientometric Measures.Electronic physician · 2016Article
- Impact of NIHR HTA Programme funded research on NICE clinical guidelines: a retrospective cohort.Health research policy and systems · 2015Article
- Assessing research impact in academic clinical medicine: a study using Research Excellence Framework pilot impact indicators.BMC health services research · 2012Article
- Tracing the indirect societal impacts of biomedical research: development and piloting of a technique based on citations.ScientometricsArticle
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate the feasibility of using research papers cited in clinical guidelines as a way to track the impact of particular funding streams or sources.
settingIn recent years, medical research funders have made efforts to enhance the understanding of the impact of their funded research and to provide evidence of the 'value' of investments in particular areas of research. One of the most challenging areas of research evaluation is around impact on policy and practice. In the UK, the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) provide clinical guidelines, which bring together current high-quality evidence on the diagnosis and treatment of clinical problems. Research referenced in these guidelines is an indication of its potential to have real impact on health policy and practice.
designThis study is based on analysis of the authorship and funding attribution of research cited in two NICE clinical guidelines: dementia and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
resultsAnalysis identified that around a third of papers cited in the two NICE guidelines had at least one author based in the UK. In both cases, about half of these UK attributed papers contained acknowledgements which allowed the source of funding for the research to be identified. The research cited in these guidelines was found to have been supported by a diverse set of funders from different sectors. The study also investigated the contribution of research groups based in universities, industry and the public sector.
conclusionsThe study found that there is great potential for guidelines to be used as sources of information on the quality of the research used in their development and that it is possible to track the source of the funding of the research. The challenge is in harnessing the relevant information to track this in an efficient way.
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.