Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27473051›Full record

ArticleHealth research policy and systems2016

Development of training for medicines-oriented policymakers to apply evidence.

H L Colquhoun, E Helis, D Lowe, D Belanger, S Hill, A Mayhew, M Taylor, J M Grimshaw

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Health research policy and systems, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

8 authors.

H L ColquhounDepartment of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, University of Toronto, 160-500 University Ave, Toronto, ON, M5G 1V7, Canada. heather.colquhoun@utoronto.ca.
E HelisCanadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH), 865 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, ON, K1S 5S8, Canada.
D LoweCentre for Health Communication and Participation, School of Psychology and Public Health, College of Science, Health and Engineering, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia.
D BelangerCanadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH), 865 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, ON, K1S 5S8, Canada.
S HillCentre for Health Communication and Participation, School of Psychology and Public Health, College of Science, Health and Engineering, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia.
A MayhewC.T. Lamont Primary Health Care Research Centre, Bruyère Research Institute, 43 Bruyère Street, Annex E - 208, Ottawa, ON, K1N 5C8, Canada.
M TaylorPublic Health, School of Allied Health, Australian Catholic University, Fitzroy, VIC, 3065, Australia.
J M GrimshawC.T. Lamont Primary Health Care Research Centre, Bruyère Research Institute, 43 Bruyère Street, Annex E - 208, Ottawa, ON, K1N 5C8, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth systems globally promote appropriate prescribing by healthcare providers and safe and effective medicine use by consumers. Rx for Change, a publicly available database, provides access to systematic reviews regarding best practices for prescribing and using medicines. Despite the value of the database for improving prescribing and medicine use, its use remains suboptimal. This study aimed to develop a training program for five medicine-focused organisations in Canada and Australia to facilitate the use and understanding of the Rx for Change database.

methodsFour steps were undertaken: 1) key informant interviews were completed across all organisations to understand the knowledge user perspective; 2) a directed content analysis was completed of the interview transcripts and proposed training was developed; 3) a second round of feedback on the proposed training by knowledge users was gathered; and 4) feedback was integrated to develop the final training.

resultsSixteen key informant interviews with knowledge users were conducted. Themes for training content included the scope of, navigation and strategies for using Rx for Change (generic content) and practical examples on incorporating evidence within their workplace context (tailored content). The final training consisted of an informational video, a 60-minute face-to-face workshop and two post-training reminders.

conclusionsA method of engaging knowledge users in the development of a training program to improve the use of an on-line database of systematic reviews was established and used to design training. Next steps include the delivery and evaluation of the training.

Indexed as

Databases, FactualDrug PrescriptionsEducationEvidence-Based PracticeHealth PolicyPolicy MakingAccess to InformationAustraliaCanadaHealth EducationHealth PersonnelHumansKnowledgeOrganizationsReview Literature as TopicEvidence-informedIntegrated knowledge translationKnowledge user engagementPrescribing medicinesRx for ChangeSystematic reviews

Identifiers

PMID27473051
PMCPMC4966170

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.