ReviewCanadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie2014
A narrative review of recent developments in knowledge translation and implications for mental health care providers.
Review in Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Implementation Strategies for Knowledge Products in Primary Health Care: Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews.Interactive journal of medical research · 2022Review
- Improving the usefulness of evidence concerning the effectiveness of implementation strategies for knowledge products in primary healthcare: protocol for a series of systematic reviews.Systematic reviews · 2020Article
- Impact of tailored blogs and content on usage of Web CIPHER - an online platform to help policymakers better engage with evidence from research.Health research policy and systems · 2016Article
- Global research challenges and opportunities for mental health and substance-use disorders.Nature · 2015Review
- Random but Controlled Thoughts on Mental Health Epidemiology and Services Research.Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie · 2015Article
- Perceptions of national guidelines and their (non) implementation in mental healthcare: a deductive and inductive content analysis.Implementation science : IS · 2015Article
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 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveAttention to knowledge translation (KT) has increased in the health care field in an effort to improve uptake and implementation of potentially beneficial knowledge. We provide an overview of the current state of KT literature and discuss the relevance of KT for health care professionals working in mental health.
methodA systematic search was conducted using MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL databases to identify review articles published in journals from 2007 to 2012. We selected articles on the basis of eligibility criteria and then added further articles deemed pertinent to the focus of ourpaper.
resultsAfter removing duplicates, we scanned 214 review articles for relevance and, subsequently, we added 46 articles identified through hand searches of reference lists or from other sources. A total of 61 papers were retained for full review. Qualitative synthesis identified 5 main themes: defining KT and development of KT science; effective KT strategies; factors influencing the effectiveness of KT; KT frameworks and guides; and relevance of KT to health care providers.
conclusionsDespite limitations in existing evidence, the concept and practice of KT holds potential value for mental health care providers. Understanding of, and familiarity with, effective approaches to KT holds the potential to enhance providers' treatment approaches and to promote the use of new knowledge in practice to enhance outcomes.
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.