Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31113449›Full record

ArticleImplementation science : IS2019

Attributes of context relevant to healthcare professionals' use of research evidence in clinical practice: a multi-study analysis.

Janet E Squires, Laura D Aloisio, Jeremy M Grimshaw, Kainat Bashir, Kristin Dorrance, Mary Coughlin, Alison M Hutchinson, Jill Francis, Susan Michie, Anne Sales and 8 more

Abstract read
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 49 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

49 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. A Comprehensive Tool to Support Family Physicians and Burn Survivors in the Provision of Long-term Burn Survivor Care.Journal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Context factors for implementation of clinical recommendations for chronic musculoskeletal pain.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

18 authors.

Janet E SquiresDepartment of Health Sciences, School of Nursing, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada. jasquires@ohri.ca.
Laura D AloisioClinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Jeremy M GrimshawClinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Kainat BashirInstitute of Health Policy, Management, Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Kristin DorranceClinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Mary CoughlinClinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Alison M HutchinsonMonash Health, Melbourne, Australia.
Jill FrancisClinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Susan MichieUniversity College London, London, UK.
Anne SalesUniversity of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Jamie BrehautClinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Janet CurranFaculty of Health, School of Nursing, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada.
Noah IversWomen's College Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.
John LavisMcMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Thomas NoseworthyUniversity of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Jocelyn VineIWK Health Centre, Halifax, NS, Canada.
Michael HillmerOntario Ministry of Health and Long-term Care, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Ian D GrahamClinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.

Funding

CIHR mop-137010
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo increase the likelihood of successful implementation of evidence-based practices, researchers, knowledge users, and healthcare professionals must consider aspects of context that promote and hinder implementation in their setting. The purpose of the current study was to identify contextual attributes and their features relevant to implementation by healthcare professionals and compare and contrast these attributes and features across different clinical settings and healthcare professional roles.

methodsWe conducted a secondary analysis of 145 semi-structured interviews comprising 11 studies (10 from Canada and one from Australia) investigating healthcare professionals' perceived barriers and enablers to their use of research evidence in clinical practice. The data was collected using semi-structured interview guides informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework across different healthcare professional roles, settings, and practices. We analyzed these data inductively, using constant comparative analysis, to identify attributes of context and their features reported in the interviews. We compared these data by (1) setting (primary care, hospital-medical/surgical, hospital-emergency room, hospital-critical care) and (2) professional role (physicians and residents, nurses and organ donor coordinators).

resultsWe identified 62 unique features of context, which we categorized under 14 broader attributes of context. The 14 attributes were resource access, work structure, patient characteristics, professional role, culture, facility characteristics, system features, healthcare professional characteristics, financial, collaboration, leadership, evaluation, regulatory or legislative standards, and societal influences. We found instances of the majority (n = 12, 86%) of attributes of context across multiple (n = 6 or more) clinical behaviors. We also found little variation in the 14 attributes of context by setting (primary care and hospitals) and professional role (physicians and residents, and nurses and organ donor coordinators).

conclusionsThere was considerable consistency in the 14 attributes identified irrespective of the clinical behavior, setting, or professional role, supporting broad utility of the attributes of context identified in this study. There was more variation in the finer-grained features of these attributes with the most substantial variation being by setting.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelEvidence-Based PracticeImplementation ScienceAustraliaCanadaDiffusion of InnovationHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansInterviews as TopicProfessional RoleResearch DesignContextEvidence-based practiceSecondary analysis

Identifiers

PMID31113449
PMCPMC6530177

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.