ArticleImplementation science : IS2016
Evaluating the implementation of a national clinical programme for diabetes to standardise and improve services: a realist evaluation protocol.
Article 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 15 papers.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Applying Realist Retroduction to EHR-Based Clinical Decision Support Tool Development.International journal of qualitative methods · 2025Article
- Article
- Cancer Prevention and Cultural Continuity for Métis Peoples in Canada: A Scoping Review.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024Article
- IMplementation of the Preterm Birth Surveillance PAthway: a RealisT evaluation (The IMPART Study).Implementation science communications · 2024Article
- Understanding Whether and How a Digital Health Intervention Improves Transition Care for Emerging Adults Living With Type 1 Diabetes: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Realist Evaluation.JMIR research protocols · 2023Article
- Protocol for the IMPART study: IMplementation of the preterm birth surveillance PAthway - a RealisT evaluation.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Using Electronic Health Record-Based Clinical Decision Support to Provide Social Risk-Informed Care in Community Health Centers: Protocol for the Design and Assessment of a Clinical Decision Support Tool.JMIR research protocols · 2021Article
- A micro costing analysis of the development of a primary care intervention to improve the uptake of diabetic retinopathy screening.Implementation science : IS · 2021Article
- Development of an intervention to facilitate implementation and uptake of diabetic retinopathy screening.Implementation science : IS · 2020Article
- A multistage mixed methods study protocol to evaluate the implementation and impact of a reconfiguration of acute medicine in Ireland's hospitals.BMC health services research · 2019Article
- 'Sink or Swim': A Qualitative Study to Understand How and Why Nurses Adapt to Support the Implementation of Integrated Diabetes Care.International journal of integrated care · 2019Article
- Study protocol: a pragmatic, stepped-wedge trial of tailored support for implementing social determinants of health documentation/action in community health centers, with realist evaluation.Implementation science : IS · 2019Article
- Intensive home care packages for people with dementia: a realist evaluation protocol.BMC health services research · 2018Article
- Article
- Adoption and Initial Implementation of a National Integrated Care Programme for Diabetes: A Realist Evaluation.International journal of integrated careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOver the last three decades in response to the growing burden of diabetes, countries worldwide have developed national and regional multifaceted programmes to improve the monitoring and management of diabetes and to enhance the coordination of care within and across settings. In Ireland in 2010, against a backdrop of limited dedicated strategic planning and engrained variation in the type and level of diabetes care, a national programme was established to standardise and improve care for people with diabetes in Ireland, known as the National Diabetes Programme (NDP). The NDP comprises a range of organisational and service delivery changes to support evidence-based practices and policies. This realist evaluation protocol sets out the approach that will be used to identify and explain which aspects of the programme are working, for whom and in what circumstances to produce the outcomes intended. METHODS/
designThis mixed method realist evaluation will develop theories about the relationship between the context, mechanisms and outcomes of the diabetes programme. In stage 1, to identify the official programme theories, documentary analysis and qualitative interviews were conducted with national stakeholders involved in the design, development and management of the programme. In stage 2, as part of a multiple case study design with one case per administrative region in the health system, qualitative interviews are being conducted with frontline staff and service users to explore their responses to, and reasoning about, the programme's resources (mechanisms). Finally, administrative data will be used to examine intermediate implementation outcomes such as service uptake, acceptability, and fidelity to models of care. DISCUSSION: This evaluation is using the principles of realist evaluation to examine the implementation of a national programme to standardise and improve services for people with diabetes in Ireland. The concurrence of implementation and evaluation has enabled us to produce formative feedback for the NDP while also supporting the refinement and revision of initial theories about how the programme is being implemented in the dynamic and unstable context of the Irish healthcare system.
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.