Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27583203›Full record

ArticlePreventive medicine reports2016

A bibliographic review of public health dissemination and implementation research output and citation rates.

Luke Wolfenden, Andrew J Milat, Christophe Lecathelinais, Eliza Skelton, Tara Clinton-McHarg, Christopher Williams, John Wiggers, Li Kheng Chai, Sze Lin Yoong

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 7 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Embedding research to improve program implementation in Latin America and the Caribbean.Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2017
    Article
  19. 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

9 authors.

Luke WolfendenSchool of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia; Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, NSW 2305, Australia; Hunter New England Population Health, Wallsend, NSW 2287, Australia.
Andrew J MilatSchool of Public Health, University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia; New South Wales Ministry of Health, North Sydney, NSW 2060, Australia.
Christophe LecathelinaisHunter New England Population Health, Wallsend, NSW 2287, Australia.
Eliza SkeltonSchool of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia; Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, NSW 2305, Australia.
Tara Clinton-McHargSchool of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia; Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, NSW 2305, Australia.
Christopher WilliamsSchool of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia; Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, NSW 2305, Australia.
John WiggersSchool of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia; Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, NSW 2305, Australia; Hunter New England Population Health, Wallsend, NSW 2287, Australia.
Li Kheng ChaiSchool of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia.
Sze Lin YoongSchool of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia; Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, NSW 2305, Australia; Hunter New England Population Health, Wallsend, NSW 2287, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this study was to describe the research output and citation rates (academic impact) of public health dissemination and implementation research according to research design and study type. A cross sectional bibliographic study was undertaken in 2013. All original data-based studies and review articles focusing on dissemination and implementation research that had been published in 10 randomly selected public health journals in 2008 were audited. The electronic database 'Scopus' was used to calculate 5-year citation rates for all included publications. Of the 1648 publications examined, 216 were original data-based research or literature reviews focusing on dissemination and implementation research. Of these 72% were classified as descriptive/epidemiological, 26% were intervention and just 1.9% were measurement research. Cross-sectional studies were the most common study design (47%). Reviews, randomized trials, non-randomized trials and decision/cost-effectiveness studies each represented between 6 and 10% of all output. Systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials and cohort studies were the most frequently cited study designs. The study suggests that publications that had the greatest academic impact (highest citation rates) made up only a small proportion of overall public health dissemination and implementation research output.

Indexed as

BibliographicCitationDesignDisseminationImplementationPublic healthResearch output

Identifiers

PMID27583203
PMCPMC4995384

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.