Trial reportBMJ open2014
Supporting Policy In health with Research: an Intervention Trial (SPIRIT)-protocol for a stepped wedge trial.
Trial report in BMJ open, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 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
32 citing papers in PubMed.
- Increasing the capacity of policy agencies to use research findings: a stepped-wedge trial.Health research policy and systems · 2019Trial
- Bridging theory and practice: a qualitative interview study of barriers to and facilitators of research collaborations between academia and public health services in Germany.Health research policy and systems · 2025Article
- Article
- A modified action framework to develop and evaluate academic-policy engagement interventions.Implementation science : IS · 2024Article
- Article
- A comprehensive monitoring and evaluation framework for evidence to policy networks.Evaluation and program planning · 2022Article
- Use of research evidence varied in efforts to expand specific pharmacist autonomous prescriptive authority: an evaluation and recommendations to increase research utilization.Health research policy and systems · 2022Article
- Policymakers' Research Capacities, Engagement, and Use of Research in Public Health Policymaking.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Evaluation of the performance and achievements of the WHO Evidence-informed Policy Network (EVIPNet) Europe.Health research policy and systems · 2020Article
- Indicators to evaluate organisational knowledge brokers: a scoping review.Health research policy and systems · 2020Article
- How was research engaged with and used in the development of 131 policy documents? Findings and measurement implications from a mixed methods study.Implementation science : IS · 2019Article
- How are evidence generation partnerships between researchers and policy-makers enacted in practice? A qualitative interview study.Health research policy and systems · 2019Article
- Deconstructing knowledge brokering for commissioned rapid reviews: an observational study.Health research policy and systems · 2018Observational
- Audience segmentation to disseminate behavioral health evidence to legislators: an empirical clustering analysis.Implementation science : IS · 2018Article
- What can we learn from interventions that aim to increase policy-makers' capacity to use research? A realist scoping review.Health research policy and systems · 2018Article
- A qualitative exploration of contextual factors that influence dissemination and implementation of evidence-based chronic disease prevention across four countries.BMC health services research · 2018Article
- [More Doctors recruitment program: a new approach to overcome inequalities in human resourcesPrograma Más Médicos: cómo evaluar el impacto de un enfoque innovador para superar las inequidades en recursos humanos].Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2018Article
- Organisational capacity and its relationship to research use in six Australian health policy agencies.PloS one · 2018Article
- Preliminary testing of the reliability and feasibility of SAGE: a system to measure and score engagement with and use of research in health policies and programs.Implementation science : IS · 2017Article
- Policymakers' experience of a capacity-building intervention designed to increase their use of research: a realist process evaluation.Health research policy and systems · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionGovernments in different countries have committed to better use of evidence from research in policy. Although many programmes are directed at assisting agencies to better use research, there have been few tests of the effectiveness of such programmes. This paper describes the protocol for SPIRIT (Supporting Policy In health with Research: an Intervention Trial), a trial designed to test the effectiveness of a multifaceted programme to build organisational capacity for the use of research evidence in policy and programme development. The primary aim is to determine whether SPIRIT results in an increase in the extent to which research and research expertise is sought, appraised, generated and used in the development of specific policy products produced by health policy agencies. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A stepped wedge cluster randomised trial involving six health policy agencies located in Sydney, Australia. Policy agencies are the unit of randomisation and intervention. Agencies were randomly allocated to one of three start dates (steps) to receive the 1-year intervention programme, underpinned by an action framework. The SPIRIT intervention is tailored to suit the interests and needs of each agency and includes audit, feedback and goal setting; a leadership programme; staff training; the opportunity to test systems to assist in the use of research in policies; and exchange with researchers. Outcome measures will be collected at each agency every 6 months for 30 months (starting at the beginning of step 1). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was granted by the University of Western Sydney Human Research and Ethics Committee HREC Approval H8855. The findings of this study will be disseminated broadly through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at conferences and used to inform future strategies.
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.