Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26169063›Full record

SynthesisImplementation science : IS2015

The effectiveness of knowledge translation interventions for promoting evidence-informed decision-making among nurses in tertiary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Jennifer Yost, Rebecca Ganann, David Thompson, Fazila Aloweni, Kristine Newman, Afeez Hazzan, Ann McKibbon, Maureen Dobbins, Donna Ciliska

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Implementation science : IS, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
16.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

41 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 102 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Jennifer YostSchool of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, Canada. jyost@mcmaster.ca.
Rebecca GanannSchool of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, Canada. ganannrl@mcmaster.ca.
David ThompsonSchool of Nursing, Faculty of Health and Behavioural Sciences, Lakehead University, 955 Oliver Road, Thunder Bay, ON, Canada. dsthomp1@lakeheadu.ca.
Fazila AloweniSingapore General Hospital, 31 Third Hospital Avenue, Singapore, Singapore. fazila.abu.bakar.aloweni@sgh.com.sg.
Kristine NewmanDaphne Cockwell School of Nursing, Faculty of Community Services, Ryerson University, 350 Victoria Street, Toronto, ON, Canada. kristine.newman@ryerson.ca.
Afeez HazzanDepartment of Medicine, McMaster University, St. Peter's Hospital-Hamilton Health Sciences, 88 Maplewood Avenue, Hamilton, ON, Canada. hazzanaa@mcmaster.ca.
Ann McKibbonClinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, Canada. mckib@mcmaster.ca.
Maureen DobbinsSchool of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, Canada. dobbinsm@mcmaster.ca.
Donna CiliskaSchool of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, Canada. ciliska@mcmaster.ca.
McMaster University · CALakehead University · CASingapore General Hospital · SGToronto Metropolitan University · CA

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNurses are increasingly expected to engage in evidence-informed decision-making (EIDM) to improve client and system outcomes. Despite an improved awareness about EIDM, there is a lack of use of research evidence and understanding about the effectiveness of interventions to promote EIDM. This project aimed to discover if knowledge translation (KT) interventions directed to nurses in tertiary care are effective for improving EIDM knowledge, skills, behaviours, and, as a result, client outcomes. It also sought to understand contextual factors that affect the impact of such interventions.

methodsA systematic review funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (PROSPERO registration: CRD42013003319) was conducted. Included studies examined the implementation of any KT intervention involving nurses in tertiary care to promote EIDM knowledge, skills, behaviours, and client outcomes or studies that examined contextual factors. Study designs included systematic reviews, quantitative, qualitative, and mixed method studies. The search included electronic databases and manual searching of published and unpublished literature to November 2012; key databases included MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and Excerpta Medica (EMBASE). Two reviewers independently performed study selection, risk of bias assessment, and data extraction. Studies with quantitative data determined to be clinically homogeneous were synthesized using meta-analytic methods. Studies with quantitative data not appropriate for meta-analysis were synthesized narratively by outcome. Studies with qualitative data were synthesized by theme.

resultsOf the 44,648 citations screened, 30 citations met the inclusion criteria (18 quantitative, 10 qualitative, and 2 mixed methods studies). The quality of studies with quantitative data ranged from very low to high, and quality criteria was generally met for studies with qualitative data. No studies evaluated the impact on knowledge and skills; they primarily investigated the effectiveness of multifaceted KT strategies for promoting EIDM behaviours and improving client outcomes. Almost all studies included an educational component. A meta-analysis of two studies determined that a multifaceted intervention (educational meetings and use of a mentor) did not increase engagement in a range of EIDM behaviours [mean difference 2.7, 95 % CI (-1.7 to 7.1), I (2) = 0 %]. Among the remaining studies, no definitive conclusions could be made about the relative effectiveness of the KT interventions due to variation of interventions and outcomes, as well as study limitations. Findings from studies with qualitative data identified the organizational, individual, and interpersonal factors, as well as characteristics of the innovation, that influence the success of implementation.

conclusionsKT interventions are being implemented and evaluated on nurses' behaviour and client outcomes. This systematic review may inform the selection of KT interventions and outcomes among nurses in tertiary care and decisions about further research.

Indexed as

Decision MakingEvidence-Based NursingHumansProgram DevelopmentProgram EvaluationTertiary Health CareTranslational Research, Biomedical

Identifiers

PMID26169063
PMCPMC4499897
OpenAlexW1821441292

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.