ReviewSystematic reviews2014
A realist review of educational interventions to improve the delivery of nutrition care by doctors and future doctors.
Review in Systematic reviews, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Implementation of Home-Based Telerehabilitation of Patients With Stroke in the United States: Protocol for a Realist Review.JMIR research protocols · 2023Article
- Impact Evaluation of An Interdisciplinary Educational Intervention to Health Professionals for the Treatment of Mild to Moderate Child Malnutrition in Mexico: A Difference-in-Differences Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- The mental health and well-being of internally displaced female Yazidis in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq: a realist review of psychosocial interventions and the impact of COVID-19.Global mental health (Cambridge, England) · 2022Review
- The informed consent process in health research with under-served populations: a realist review protocol.Systematic reviews · 2021Article
- Why nutrition education is inadequate in the medical curriculum: a qualitative study of students' perspectives on barriers and strategies.BMC medical education · 2018Article
- Article
- Early years interventions to improve child health and wellbeing: what works, for whom and in what circumstances? Protocol for a realist review.Systematic reviews · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDietary interventions are considered an important aspect of clinical practice, more so in the face of the rising prevalence of obesity, diabetes and cardiovascular diseases globally. Routinely, most doctors do not provide such intervention to their patients, and several barriers, present during both training and clinical practice, have been identified. Educational interventions to improve nutrition care competencies and delivery have been implemented but with variable success, probably, due to the complex nature of such interventions. Using traditional methods only to investigate whether interventions are effective or not could not provide appropriate lessons. It is therefore pertinent to conduct a realist review that investigates how the interventions work. This realist review aims at determining what sort of educational interventions work, how, for whom, and in what circumstances, to improve the delivery of nutrition care by doctors and future doctors. METHODS/
designThis realist review will be conducted according to Pawson's five practical steps for conducting a realist review: (1) clarifying the scope of the review, (2) determining the search strategy, including adopting broad inclusion/exclusion criteria and purposive snowballing techniques, (3) ensuring proper article selection and study quality assessment using multiple methods, (4) extracting and organising data through the process of note taking, annotation and conceptualization and (5) synthesising the evidence and drawing conclusions through a process of reasoning. This realist review protocol has not been registered in any database before now. DISCUSSION: Findings will be reported according to the publication criteria outlined by the realist and meta-narrative evidence synthesis (RAMESES) group.
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.