ArticleBMJ open2014
Addressing the evidence to practice gap for complex interventions in primary care: a systematic review of reviews protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 19 papers, 3 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Achieving change in primary care--causes of the evidence to practice gap: systematic reviews of reviews.Implementation science : IS · 2016Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Printed educational materials directed at Ontario family physicians do not improve adherence to guideline recommendations for diabetes management: a pragmatic, factorial, cluster randomized controlled trial [ISRCTN72772651].BMC family practice · 2021Trial
- Design and evaluation of an implementation strategy of a diabetic foot program in primary care: study protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial (iMplanta study).BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Formative Evaluation of an Early Family-Centred Prevention Programme for Childhood Overweight and Obesity (FruehstArt): A Study Protocol.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Scaling holistic e-health solutions in cancer care using a qualitative realist framework.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- A scoping review on implementation processes and outcomes of models of care for low back pain in primary healthcare.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- A pragmatic, stepped-wedge, hybrid type II trial of interoperable clinical decision support to improve venous thromboembolism prophylaxis for patients with traumatic brain injury.Implementation science : IS · 2024Article
- Exploring How Virtual Reality Could Be Used to Treat Eating Disorders: Qualitative Study of People With Eating Disorders and Clinicians Who Treat Them.JMIR XR and spatial computing · 2024Article
- Article
- Evidence-informed practice versus evidence-based practice educational interventions for improving knowledge, attitudes, understanding, and behavior toward the application of evidence into practice: A comprehensive systematic review of UG student.Campbell systematic reviews · 2022Review
- Integrated Care Programs for People with Multimorbidity in European Countries: eHealth Adoption in Health Systems.BioMed research international · 2020Article
- PROTOCOL: Evidence-informed practice versus evidence-based practice educational interventions for improving knowledge, attitudes, understanding, and behavior toward the application of evidence into practice: A comprehensive systematic review of undergraduate students.Campbell systematic reviews · 2019Article
- The facilitators and barriers to implementing patient reported outcome measures in organisations delivering health related services: a systematic review of reviews.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2018Review
- Improving the sustainability of hospital-based interventions: a study protocol for a systematic review.BMJ open · 2018Article
- Use of the electronic Frailty Index to identify vulnerable patients: a pilot study in primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2017Article
- Using intervention mapping to develop a theory-driven, group-based complex intervention to support self-management of osteoarthritis and low back pain (SOLAS).Implementation science : IS · 2016Review
- Exploring the challenges of implementing e-health: a protocol for an update of a systematic review of reviews.BMJ open · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionGetting the results of research implemented into routine healthcare is often a challenge. The disconnect between the development and implementation of evidence into practice is called the 'second translational gap' and is particularly apparent in primary care. To address this gap, we plan to identify, summarise and synthesise currently available evidence by undertaking a systematic review of reviews to: (1) explore barriers and facilitators of implementation of research evidence or complex interventions, and (2) assess the effectiveness of strategies in facilitating implementation of complex interventions in primary care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a protocol for a systematic review of reviews. We will search MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL and PsycINFO up until December 2013. We will check reference lists of included studies for further studies. Two authors will independently screen the titles and abstracts identified from the search; any discrepancies will be resolved by discussion and consensus. Full-text papers will be obtained and relevant reviews will be selected against inclusion criteria. Eligible reviews have to be based on predominantly primary care in developed countries and examine either factors to implementation or, the effectiveness of strategies to optimise implementation. Data from eligible reviews will be extracted using standardised data abstraction forms. For barriers and facilitators, data will be synthesised using an interpretative meta-synthesis approach. For implementation strategies, findings will be summarised and described narratively and synthesised using a framework approach. All findings will be reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required. The review findings will inform the work of the design and implementation of future studies and will be of interest to a wide audience including health professionals, researchers, health service or commissioning managers and policymakers. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Protocol registration number (PROSPERO CRD42014009410).
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.