ArticleBMJ open2016
Core requirements for successful data linkage: an example of a triangulation method.
Article in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Blood transfusion in haematology: A qualitative exploration of patients' and healthcare professionals' perceptions.British journal of health psychology · 2022Pooled it
- The engagement equation: a model for understanding what drives voluntary physician engagement with data-driven clinical performance feedback.Implementation science communications · 2025Article
- Linking local cancer registries and national death records: a crucial step for accurate survival data in Saudi Arabia.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Development and Piloting of Implementation Strategies to Support Delivery of a Clinical Intervention for Postpartum Hemorrhage in Four sub-Saharan Africa Countries.Global health, science and practice · 2024Article
- IMpleMenting Effective infection prevention and control in ReSidential aged carE (IMMERSE): protocol for a multi-level mixed methods implementation study.BMC geriatrics · 2023Article
- Optimizing responsiveness to feedback about antibiotic prescribing in primary care: protocol for two interrelated randomized implementation trials with embedded process evaluations.Implementation science : IS · 2022Article
- Article
- Formative research to design an implementation strategy for a postpartum hemorrhage initial response treatment bundle (E-MOTIVE): study protocol.Reproductive health · 2021Article
- An interdisciplinary mixed-methods approach to developing antimicrobial stewardship interventions: Protocol for the Preserving Antibiotics through Safe Stewardship (PASS) Research Programme.Wellcome open research · 2020Article
- A multidimensional approach to assessing intervention fidelity in a process evaluation of audit and feedback interventions to reduce unnecessary blood transfusions: a study protocol.Implementation science : IS · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe aim was to explore the views of professional stakeholders and healthcare professionals (HCPs) on the linkage of UK National Health Service (NHS) data for paediatric pharmacovigilance purposes and to make recommendations for such a system.
methodsA mixed methods approach including a literature review, interviews, focus groups and a three-round Delphi survey with HCPs in Scotland was followed by a triangulation process using a systematic protocol. The survey was structured using the Theoretical Domains Framework of behaviour change. Items retained after applying the matrix-based triangulation process were thematically coded. Ethical approval was granted by the North of Scotland Research Ethics Service.
resultsResults from 18 papers, 23 interviewees, 23 participants of focus groups and 61 completed questionnaires in the Delphi survey contributed to the triangulation process. A total of 25 key findings from all four studies were identified during triangulation. There was good convergence; 21 key findings were agreed and remained to inform recommendations. The items were coded as practical/technical (eg, decision about the unique patient identifier to use), mandatory (eg, governed by statute), essential (consistently mentioned in all studies and therefore needed to ensure professional support) or preferable.
conclusionsThe development of a paediatric linked database has support from professional stakeholders and HCPs in Scotland. The triangulation identified three sets of core requirements for a new system of data linkage. An additional fourth set of 'preferable' requirements might increase engagement of HCPs and their support for the new 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.