Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30841893›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2019

Implementing an initiative to promote evidence-informed practice: part 1 - a description of the Evidence Rounds programme.

Aislinn Conway, Maura Dowling, Áine Binchy, Jane Grosvenor, Margaret Coohill, Deirdre Naughton, Jean James, Declan Devane

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. 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

8 authors.

Aislinn ConwayHealth Research Board Trials Methodology Research Network, Galway, Ireland. aislinnconway@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7566-3138
Maura DowlingSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway, Ireland.
Áine BinchySchool of Nursing and Midwifery, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway, Ireland.
Jane GrosvenorSt. Clare's Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, Galway University Hospitals, Galway, Ireland.
Margaret CoohillUniversity Hospital Galway, Galway University Hospitals, Galway, Ireland.
Deirdre NaughtonSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway, Ireland.
Jean JamesSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway, Ireland.
Declan DevaneHealth Research Board Trials Methodology Research Network, Galway, Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvidence-informed practice is fundamental to the delivery of high quality health care. Delays and gaps in the translation of research into practice can impact negatively on patient care. Previous studies have reported that problems facing health care professionals such as information overload, underdeveloped critical appraisal skills, lack of time and other individual, organisational and system-level contextual factors are barriers to the uptake of evidence. Health services research in this area has been restricted largely to the evaluation of program outcomes. This paper aims to describe the implementation process of an educational initiative for health care professionals working in midwifery, neonatology or obstetrics aimed at disseminating evidence and enhancing evidence-informed clinical care.

methodsWe designed and implemented an educational initiative called Evidence Rounds for health care professionals working in the women and children's division of an urban hospital in Ireland. It consisted of three core components: (1) group educational sessions examining evidence on topics chosen by staff (2) a dedicated website and (3) facilitation, enablement and support from a knowledge translation professional. We evaluated user engagement in the educational program by monitoring attendance figures and website analytics. We followed up with staff at 3, 16 and 21-month intervals after the last educational session to find out whether evidence had been implemented. We use Lavis's organising framework for knowledge transfer and the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist to describe the educational program and document the implementation process.

resultsSix educational sessions presented by 18 health care professionals took place over a nine month period with 148 attendances of which 85 were unique (individuals who attended at least one session). During the period spanning from one month before, during and one month after the running of the group sessions, 188 unique visitors, 331 visits and 862 page views were recorded on our website.

conclusionsAudit and feedback processes can provide quantitative data to track practice outcomes. Achieving sustainable educational programs can be challenging without dedicated resources such as staffing and funding.

Indexed as

Health Services ResearchEvidence-Based MedicineHumansMidwiferyNeonatologyObstetricsProgram DevelopmentProgram EvaluationQuality of Health CareAdaptationContextDisseminationEducationEvidence-informed practiceHealth services researchImplementationKnowledge translationSustainabilityTIDieR

Identifiers

PMID30841893
PMCPMC6402167

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.