Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22856688›Full record

SynthesisBMC public health2012

Applying what works: a systematic search of the transfer and implementation of promising Indigenous Australian health services and programs.

Janya McCalman, Komla Tsey, Anton Clifford, Wendy Earles, Anthony Shakeshaft, Roxanne Bainbridge

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC public health, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Janya McCalmanThe Cairns Institute and School of Education, James Cook University, McGregor Rd, Smithfield 4878, Australia. Janya.mccalman@jcu.edu.au
Komla Tsey
Anton Clifford
Wendy Earles
Anthony Shakeshaft
Roxanne Bainbridge
Australian Institute of Tropical Health and Medicine · AUInstitute for Urban Indigenous Health · AUJames Cook University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe transfer and implementation of acceptable and effective health services, programs and innovations across settings provides an important and potentially cost-effective strategy for reducing Indigenous Australians' high burden of disease. This study reports a systematic review of Indigenous health services, programs and innovations to examine the extent to which studies considered processes of transfer and implementation within and across Indigenous communities and healthcare settings.

methodsMedline, Informit, Infotrac, Blackwells Publishing, Proquest, Taylor and Francis, JStor, and the Indigenous HealthInfoNet were searched using terms: Aborigin* OR Indigen* OR Torres AND health AND service OR program* OR intervention AND Australia to locate publications from 1992-2011. The reference lists of 19 reviews were also checked. Data from peer reviewed journals, reports, and websites were included. The 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for proportions that referred to and focussed on transfer were calculated as exact binomial confidence intervals. Test comparisons between proportions were calculated using Fisher's exact test with an alpha level of 5%.

resultsOf 1311 publications identified, 119 (9.1%; 95% CI: 7.6%-10.8%) referred to the transfer and implementation of Indigenous Australian health services or programs, but only 21 studies (1.6%; 95% CI: 1.0%-2.4%) actually focused on transfer and implementation. Of the 119 transfer studies, 37 (31.1%; 95% CI: 22.9-40.2%) evaluated the impact of a service or program, 28 (23.5%; 95% CI: 16.2%-32.2%) reported only process measures and 54 were descriptive. Of the 37 impact evaluation studies, 28 (75.7%; 95% CI: 58.8%-88.2%) appeared in peer reviewed journals but none included experimental designs.

conclusionWhile services and programs are being transferred and implemented, few studies focus on the process by which this occurred or the effectiveness of the service or program in the new setting. Findings highlight a need for partnerships between researchers and health services to evaluate the transfer and implementation of Indigenous health services and programs using rigorous designs, and publish such efforts in peer-reviewed journals as a quality assurance mechanism.

Indexed as

AustraliaHealth Plan ImplementationHealth Services AccessibilityHealth Services, IndigenousHumans

Identifiers

PMID22856688
PMCPMC3490811
OpenAlexW2141003342

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.