ArticleImplementation science : IS2019
The role of scientific evidence in decisions to adopt complex innovations in cancer care settings: a multiple case study in Nova Scotia, Canada.
Article in Implementation science : IS, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Examining the sustainability and effectiveness of co-created physical activity interventions in vocational education and training: a multimethod evaluation.BMC public health · 2022Trial
- Outcomes of a penicillin allergy de-labelling implementation intervention in a UK hospital: a prospective, single centre, type 2 hybrid effectiveness-implementation study evaluated using mixed methods.Implementation science communications · 2026Article
- Characterizing screening champions in the center for disease control and prevention's Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP).Implementation science communications · 2025Article
- Mind the (research) gap: a retrospective observational study on the utilization of new medical technologies and related research activities in German hospitals.Health research policy and systems · 2025Observational
- The co-design of a digitally supported intervention for selecting implementation tools and actions for standards (SITAS).BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Champions to enhance implementation of clinical and community-based interventions in cancer: a scoping review.Implementation science communications · 2024Article
- Factors Influencing the Adoption of Magnetic Resonance-Guided High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound for Painful Bone Metastases in Europe, A Group Concept Mapping Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Developing an implementation research logic model: using a multiple case study design to establish a worked exemplar.Implementation science communications · 2022Article
- Monitor to innovate with feedback loops: process evaluation protocol for an anemia prevention intervention.Gates open research · 2022Article
- Stakeholder-Identified Interventions to Address Cancer Survivors' Psychosocial Needs after Completing Treatment.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2021Article
- Implementation of innovative medical technologies in German inpatient care: patterns of utilization and evidence development.Implementation science : IS · 2021Article
- Implementation of targeted screening for poverty in a large primary care team in Toronto, Canada: a feasibility study.BMC family practice · 2021Article
- Implementation of artificial intelligence (AI) applications in radiology: hindering and facilitating factors.European radiology · 2020Article
- Lessons learned about the effective operationalization of champions as an implementation strategy: results from a qualitative process evaluation of a pragmatic trial.Implementation science : IS · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHealth care delivery and outcomes can be improved by using innovations (i.e., new ideas, technologies, and practices) supported by scientific evidence. However, scientific evidence may not be the foremost factor in adoption decisions and is rarely sufficient. The objective of this study was to examine the role of scientific evidence in decisions to adopt complex innovations in cancer care.
methodsUsing an explanatory, multiple case study design, we examined the adoption of complex innovations in five purposively sampled cases in Nova Scotia, Canada. Data were collected via documents and key informant interviews. Data analysis involved an in-depth analysis of each case, followed by a cross-case analysis to develop theoretically informed, generalizable knowledge on the role of scientific evidence in innovation adoption that may be applied to similar settings and contexts.
resultsThe analyses identified key concepts alongside important caveats and considerations. Key concepts were (1) scientific evidence underpinned the adoption process, (2) evidence from multiple sources informed decision-making, (3) decision-makers considered three key issues when making decisions, and (4) champions were essential to eventual adoption. Caveats and considerations related to the presence of urgent problems and short-term financial pressures and minimizing risk.
conclusionsThe findings revealed the different types of issues decision-makers consider while making these decisions and why different sources of evidence are needed in these processes. Future research should examine how different types of evidence are legitimized and why some types are prioritized over others.
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.