Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30917844›Full record

ArticleImplementation science : IS2019

How the study of networks informs knowledge translation and implementation: a scoping review.

Stephanie M N Glegg, Emily Jenkins, Anita Kothari

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

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 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
18.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 100 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Interorganizational Networks in Physical Activity Promotion: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Stephanie M N GleggRehabilitation Sciences, The University of British Columbia, 212 - 2177 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z3, Canada. sglegg@cw.bc.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-8164-6983
Emily JenkinsSchool of Nursing, The University of British Columbia, T201-2211 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 2B5, Canada.
Anita KothariSchool of Health Studies, Western University, Arthur and Sonia Labatt Health Sciences Building, Room 222, London, ON, V6A 5B9, Canada.
University of British Columbia · CAWestern University · CA

Funding

CIHR Vanier Canada Graduate Scholarship
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo date, implementation science has focused largely on identifying the individual and organizational barriers, processes, and outcomes of knowledge translation (KT) (including implementation efforts). Social network analysis (SNA) has the potential to augment our understanding of KT success by applying a network lens that examines the influence of relationships and social structures on research use and intervention acceptability by health professionals. The purpose of this review was to comprehensively map the ways in which SNA methodologies have been applied to the study of KT with respect to health professional networks.

methodsSystematic scoping review methodology involved searching five academic databases for primary research on KT that employed quantitative SNA methods, and inclusion screening using predetermined criteria. Data extraction included information on study aim, population, variables, network properties, theory use, and data collection methods. Descriptive statistics and chronology charting preceded theoretical analysis of findings.

resultsTwenty-seven retained articles describing 19 cross-sectional and 2 longitudinal studies reported on 28 structural properties, with degree centrality, tie characteristics (e.g., homophily, reciprocity), and whole network density being most frequent. Eleven studies examined physician-only networks, 9 focused on interprofessional networks, and 1 reported on a nurse practitioner network. Diffusion of innovation, social contagion, and social influence theories were most commonly applied.

conclusionsEmerging interest in SNA for KT- and implementation-related research is evident. The included articles focused on individual level evidence-based decision-making: we recommend also applying SNA to meso- or macro-level KT activities. SNA research that expands the range of professions under study, examines network dynamics over time, extends the depth of analysis of the role of network structure on KT processes and outcomes, and employs mixed methods to triangulate findings, is needed to advance the field. SNA is a valuable approach for evaluating key network characteristics, structures and positions of relevance to KT, implementation, and evidence informed practice. Examining how network structure influences connections and the implications of those holding prominent network positions can provide insights to improve network-based KT processes.

Indexed as

Implementation ScienceDiffusion of InnovationEpidemiologic MethodsEvidence-Based PracticeHealth PersonnelHumansInformation Seeking BehaviorMedical InformaticsPhysiciansSocial NetworkingTranslational Research, BiomedicalEvidence-based practiceImplementationInformation flowKnowledge translationNetworkScoping reviewSocial network analysis

Identifiers

PMID30917844
PMCPMC6437864
OpenAlexW2938407203

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.