ArticleHealth research policy and systems2015
Does health intervention research have real world policy and practice impacts: testing a new impact assessment tool.
Article in Health research policy and systems, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 4 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
32 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Applying a framework to assess the impact of cardiovascular outcomes improvement research.Health research policy and systems · 2021Pooled it
- The impact of patient-reported outcome (PRO) data from clinical trials: a systematic review and critical analysis.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2019Pooled it
- How do we define the policy impact of public health research? A systematic review.Health research policy and systems · 2017Pooled it
- Assessing the impact of healthcare research: A systematic review of methodological frameworks.PLoS medicine · 2017Pooled it
- Building evidence for prevention: case studies on research impacts and influences on health policy, practice, and research capacity.Translational behavioral medicine · 2026Article
- Developing health research impact assessment in Italy: the case of the Piedmont Region.Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene · 2025Article
- Examining rural health equity and impact through the translational science benefits model: outcomes from the CTSA Consortium of Rural States (CORES).Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- From trials to communities: implementation and scale-up of health behaviour interventions.Health research policy and systems · 2023Article
- Describing the state of a research network: A mixed methods approach to network evaluation.Research Evaluation · 2023Article
- What funders are doing to assess the impact of their investments in health and biomedical research.Health research policy and systems · 2022Review
- What shapes research and research capacity building in rural health services? Context matters.The Australian journal of rural health · 2022Article
- How personalisation programs can exacerbate socio-economic inequities: findings from budget utilisation in the Australian National Disability Insurance Scheme.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Collective health research assessment: developing a tool to measure the impact of multistakeholder research initiatives.Health research policy and systems · 2022Article
- Increased use of knowledge translation strategies is associated with greater research impact on public health policy and practice: an analysis of trials of nutrition, physical activity, sexual health, tobacco, alcohol and substance use interventions.Health research policy and systems · 2022Article
- Impact of Ed-LinQ: A Public Policy Strategy to Facilitate Engagement between Schools and the Mental Health Care System in Queensland, Australia.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Exploring the Use of Evidence From the Development and Evaluation of an Electronic Health (eHealth) Trial: Case Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- Evaluating research investment and impact at a regional Australian Hospital and Health Service: a programme theory and conceptual framework.Health research policy and systems · 2020Article
- #Ihaveembraced: a pilot cross-sectional naturalistic evaluation of the documentary film Embrace and its potential associations with body image in adult women.BMC women's health · 2020Article
- The Estimating effectiveness from efficacy taxonomy (EFFECT): A tool to estimate the real-world impact of health interventions.Diabetes research and clinical practice · 2020Article
- Using the Contribution Analysis Approach to Evaluate Science Impact: A Case Study of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.The American journal of evaluation · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is a growing emphasis on the importance of research having demonstrable public benefit. Measurements of the impacts of research are therefore needed. We applied a modified impact assessment process that builds on best practice to 5 years (2003-2007) of intervention research funded by Australia's National Health and Medical Research Council to determine if these studies had post-research real-world policy and practice impacts.
methodsWe used a mixed method sequential methodology whereby chief investigators of eligible intervention studies who completed two surveys and an interview were included in our final sample (n = 50), on which we conducted post-research impact assessments. Data from the surveys and interviews were triangulated with additional information obtained from documentary analysis to develop comprehensive case studies. These case studies were then summarized and the reported impacts were scored by an expert panel using criteria for four impact dimensions: corroboration; attribution, reach, and importance.
resultsNineteen (38%) of the cases in our final sample were found to have had policy and practice impacts, with an even distribution of high, medium, and low impact scores. While the tool facilitated a rigorous and explicit criterion-based assessment of post-research impacts, it was not always possible to obtain evidence using documentary analysis to corroborate the impacts reported in chief investigator interviews.
conclusionsWhile policy and practice is ideally informed by reviews of evidence, some intervention research can and does have real world impacts that can be attributed to single studies. We recommend impact assessments apply explicit criteria to consider the corroboration, attribution, reach, and importance of reported impacts on policy and practice. Impact assessments should also allow sufficient time between impact data collection and completion of the original research and include mechanisms to obtain end-user input to corroborate claims and reduce biases that result from seeking information from researchers only.
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.