Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29074511›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2017

Bridging knowledge, policies and practices across the ageing and disability fields: a protocol for a scoping review to inform the development of a taxonomy.

Emily Joan Nalder, Michelle Putnam, Luis Salvador-Carulla, Andria Spindel, Zinnia Batliwalla, Erica Lenton

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2017. 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. Trial
  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

6 authors.

Emily Joan NalderDepartment of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, Rehabilitation Sciences Institute, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9612-9420
Michelle PutnamSchool of Social Work, Simmons College, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Luis Salvador-CarullaCentre for Mental Health Research, Research School of Population Health, College of Health and Medicine, Australian National University, Canberra, New South Wales, Australia.
Andria SpindelMarch of Dimes Canada, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Zinnia BatliwallaMarch of Dimes Canada, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Erica LentonGerstein Science Information Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionBridging is a term used to describe activities, or tasks, used to promote collaboration and knowledge exchange across fields. This paper reports the protocol for a scoping review which aims to identify and characterise peer reviewed evidence describing bridging activities, between the ageing and disability fields. The purpose is to clarify the concepts underpinning bridging to inform the development of a taxonomy, and identify research strengths and gaps.

methodsA scoping review will be conducted. We will search Medline, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Embase, PsycInfo, Sociological Abstracts and the Cochrane Library, to identify peer reviewed publications (reviews, experimental, observational, qualitative designs and expert commentaries) describing bridging activities. Grey literature, and articles not published in English will be excluded. Two investigators will independently complete article selection and data abstraction to minimise bias. A data extraction form will be iteratively developed and information from each publication will be extracted: (1) bibliographic, (2) methodological, (3) demographic, and (4) bridging information. Qualitative content analysis will be used to describe key concepts related to bridging.

conclusionsTo our knowledge, this will be the first scoping review to describe bridging of ageing and disability knowledge, services and policies. The findings will inform the development of a taxonomy to define models of bridging that can be implemented and further evaluated to enable integrated care and improve systems and services for those ageing with disability. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics is not required because this is a scoping review of published literature. Findings will be disseminated through stakeholder meetings, conference presentations and peer reviewed publication.

Indexed as

AgingHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticePersons with DisabilitiesPolicyHumansResearch DesignScoping Reviews as Topiccollaborationknowledge exchangescoping review

Identifiers

PMID29074511
PMCPMC5665221

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.