Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30621706›Full record

ArticleHealth research policy and systems2019

Integrating implementation and user-centred design strategies to enhance the impact of health services: protocol from a concept mapping study.

Alex R Dopp, Kathryn E Parisi, Sean A Munson, Aaron R Lyon

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health research policy and systems, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06803316 (Optimizing Care Delivery to Support Reengagement in PLWH Returning to HIV Care After Treatment Lapses in Zambia), which is not on this map. Cited by 47 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing 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.

NCT06803316 completednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Optimizing Care Delivery to Support Reengagement in PLWH Returning to HIV Care After Treatment Lapses in Zambia

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorCentre for Infectious Disease Research in ZambiaRan2022 to 2025Enrolled658ConditionsHIV Antiretroviral Therapy (ART) Adherence
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

47 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Processes Underpinning Successful Co-Design: Lessons From a Digital Health Project.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

Alex R DoppDepartment of Psychological Science, University of Arkansas, 216 Memorial Hall, Fayetteville, AR, 72701, USA. dopp@uark.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2522-6546
Kathryn E ParisiDepartment of Psychological Science, University of Arkansas, 216 Memorial Hall, Fayetteville, AR, 72701, USA.
Sean A MunsonDepartment of Human Centered Design and Engineering, University of Washington, 3960 Benton Lane NE, 428 Sieg Hall, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA.
Aaron R LyonDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, 1959 NE Pacific Street, Room BB1644, Box 356560, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA.

Funding

University of Arkansas 1711.01 (Marie Wilson Howells Fund, Department of Psychological Science)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInnovative approaches are needed to maximise the uptake and sustainment of evidence-based practices in a variety of health service contexts. This protocol describes a study that will seek to characterise the potential of one such approach, user-centred design (UCD), which is an emerging field that seeks to ground the design of an innovation in information about the people who will ultimately use that innovation. The use of UCD to enhance strategies for implementation of health services, although promising, requires a multidisciplinary perspective based on a firm understanding of how experts from each discipline perceives the interrelatedness and suitability of these strategies.

methodThis online study will use a combination of purposive and snowball sampling to recruit a sample of implementation experts (n = 30) and UCD experts (n = 30). These participants will each complete a concept mapping task, which is a mixed-method conceptualisation technique that will allow for identification of distinct clusters of implementation and/or UCD strategies. The research team has selected a set of implementation strategies and UCD strategies that each participant will sort and rate on dimensions of importance and feasibility. Data analyses will focus on describing the sample, identifying related clusters of strategies, and examining the convergences, divergences, and potential for collaboration between implementation science and UCD. DISCUSSION: By leading to a better understanding of the overlap between implementation science and UCD, grounded within established theoretical frameworks, this study holds promise for improving the impact and sustainability of evidence-based health services in community settings.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareHealth ServicesPatient-Centered CareEvidence-Based MedicineHumansConcept mappingEvidence-based practiceHuman-centred designImplementation strategiesUser-centred design

Identifiers

PMID30621706
PMCPMC6323703

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.