Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23392560›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of public health2013

The Registry of Knowledge Translation Methods and Tools: a resource to support evidence-informed public health.

Leslea Peirson, Cristina Catallo, Sunita Chera

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of public health, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. 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

3 authors.

Leslea PeirsonMcMaster Evidence Review and Synthesis Centre, McMaster University, Downtown Centre, Hamilton, ON, Canada. peirson@mcmaster.ca
Cristina Catallo
Sunita Chera

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis paper examines the development of a globally accessible online Registry of Knowledge Translation Methods and Tools to support evidence-informed public health.

methodsA search strategy, screening and data extraction tools, and writing template were developed to find, assess, and summarize relevant methods and tools. An interactive website and searchable database were designed to house the registry. Formative evaluation was undertaken to inform refinements.

resultsOver 43,000 citations were screened; almost 700 were full-text reviewed, 140 of which were included. By November 2012, 133 summaries were available. Between January 1 and November 30, 2012 over 32,945 visitors from more than 190 countries accessed the registry. Results from 286 surveys and 19 interviews indicated the registry is valued and useful, but would benefit from a more intuitive indexing system and refinements to the summaries. User stories and promotional activities help expand the reach and uptake of knowledge translation methods and tools in public health contexts.

conclusionsThe National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools' Registry of Methods and Tools is a unique and practical resource for public health decision makers worldwide.

Indexed as

Databases, FactualDecision Support TechniquesEvidence-Based MedicinePublic Health PracticeRegistriesTranslational Research, BiomedicalHumansInformation DisseminationInformation Storage and RetrievalInternetMedical Informatics

Identifiers

PMID23392560
PMCPMC3719003

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.