Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27120996›Full record

ArticleHealth services research2016

New Evidence on What Works in Effective Public Reporting.

Brent Sandmeyer, Irene Fraser

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health services research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–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.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Hennessee et al. Respond.American journal of public health · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Patient attribution: why the method matters.The American journal of managed care · 2018
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. "Sunshine Is the Best Disinfectant".American health & drug benefits · 2017
    Article
  14. Reflections, Predictions, and Admonitions.American health & drug benefits · 2017
    Article
  15. Potential Implications of Recent and Proposed Changes in the Regulatory Oversight of Solid Organ Transplantation in the United States.American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons · 2016
    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

2 authors.

Brent SandmeyerAgency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Center for Delivery, Organization and Markets, Washington, DC.
Irene FraserNORC at the University of Chicago, Chicago, IL.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo describe the current state of the public reporting field and provide guidance to public report producers based on the evidence. PRINCIPAL

findingsPublic reports should address the questions and priorities that consumers actually have; present information credibly and in a way that is understood by the intended audience; reach the intended audience; and enable consumers to act on the information.

conclusionsPublic reports have advanced greatly in recent years, but there remains much room for improvement. Report producers should continually evaluate their reports and apply the latest evidence to maximize their usefulness and impact.

Indexed as

DisclosureOutcome Assessment, Health CareConsumer BehaviorData CollectionHumansPatient SafetyResearch ReportConsumer informationpublic reportingquality of care/patient safety

Identifiers

PMID27120996
PMCPMC4874943

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.