Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27268061›Full record

SynthesisImplementation science : IS2016

Strategies for disseminating recommendations or guidelines to patients: a systematic review.

K Schipper, M Bakker, M De Wit, J C F Ket, T A Abma

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Implementation science : IS, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
9.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Developing and Assessing the Acceptability of an Information Booklet for Patients in Surveillance for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: An Intervention Development Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Expert consensus statements and summary of proceedings from the International Safety and Quality of Parenteral Nutrition Summit.American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists · 2024
    Article
  12. Safety and quality of parenteral nutrition: Areas for improvement and future perspectives.American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Engagement of community stakeholders to develop a framework to guide research dissemination to communities.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020
    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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

K SchipperDepartment of Medical Humanities, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. k.schipper@vumc.nl.
M BakkerDepartment of Medical Humanities, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
M De WitEULAR Standing Committee of People with Arthritis/Rheumatism in Europe, Zurich, Switzerland.
J C F KetMedical Library, VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
T A AbmaDepartment of Medical Humanities, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Amsterdam UMC Location VUmc · NLEuropean League Against Rheumatism · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe aim of this systematic literature review was to assess what dissemination strategies are feasible to inform and educate patients about recommendations (also known as guidelines).

methodsThe search was performed in February 2016 in PubMed, Ebsco/PsycINFO, Ebsco/CINAHL and Embase. Studies evaluating dissemination strategies, involving patients and/or reaching patients, were included. A hand search and a search in the grey literature, also done in February 2016, were added. Searches were not restricted by language or publication type. Publications that referred to (1) guideline(s) or recommendation(s), (2) dissemination, (3) dissemination with patients/patient organisations and (4) dissemination to patients/patient organisations were included in this article. Criteria 1 AND 2 were mandatory together with criteria 3 OR 4.

resultsThe initial search revealed 3753 unique publications. Forty-seven articles met the inclusion criteria and were selected for detailed review. The hand search and grey literature resulted in four relevant articles. After reading the full text of the 47 articles, 21 were relevant for answering our research question. Most publications had low levels of evidence, 3 or 4 of the Oxford levels of evidence. One article had a level of evidence of 2(b). This article gives an overview of tools and strategies to disseminate recommendations to patients. Key factors of success were a dissemination plan, written at the start of the recommendation development process, involvement of patients in this development process and the use of a combination of traditional and innovative dissemination tools. The lack of strong evidence calls for more research of the effectiveness of different dissemination strategies as well as the barriers for implementing a strategic approach of dissemination.

conclusionOur findings provide the first systematic overview of tools and strategies to disseminate recommendations to patients and patient organisations. Participation of patients in the whole process is one of the most important findings. These findings are relevant to develop, implement and evaluate more (effective) dissemination strategies which can improve health care.

Indexed as

Practice Guidelines as TopicHealth CommunicationHumansPatient Education as TopicDisseminationGuideline(s)InvolvementPatient organisation(s)Patient(s)Recommendation(s)Systematic literature review

Identifiers

PMID27268061
PMCPMC4895829
OpenAlexW2408998900

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.