Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26297237›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2016

Development of a pharmacy practice intervention: lessons from the literature.

Carmel M Hughes, Cathal A Cadogan, Cristín A Ryan

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Low-value care in musculoskeletal health care: Is there a way forward?Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain · 2022
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. 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

3 authors.

Carmel M HughesSchool of Pharmacy, Queen's University Belfast, 97 Lisburn Road, Belfast, BT9 7BL, Northern Ireland, UK. c.hughes@qub.ac.uk.
Cathal A CadoganSchool of Pharmacy, Queen's University Belfast, 97 Lisburn Road, Belfast, BT9 7BL, Northern Ireland, UK.
Cristín A RyanSchool of Pharmacy, Queen's University Belfast, 97 Lisburn Road, Belfast, BT9 7BL, Northern Ireland, UK.

Funding

The Dunhill Medical Trust R298/0513
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The development of health interventions is receiving increasing attention within the scientific literature. In the past, interventions were often based on the ISLAGIATT principle: that is, 'It seemed like a good idea at the time'. However, such interventions were frequently ineffective because they were either delivered in part or not at all, demonstrating a lack of fidelity, or because little attention had been paid to their development, content, and mode of delivery. This commentary seeks to highlight the latest methodological advances in the field of intervention development, drawing on health psychology literature, together with guidance from key organisations and research consortia which are setting standards for development and reporting. Those working within pharmacy practice research can learn from the more systematic approach being advocated, and apply these methods to help generate evidence to support new services and professional roles.

Indexed as

Behavioral MedicineHumansModels, TheoreticalPharmacy Service, HospitalProgram DevelopmentBehaviour changeInterventionTheoretical domains framework

Identifiers

PMID26297237
PMCPMC5963678

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.