ArticleBritish journal of sports medicine2020
Maximising and evaluating the uptake, use and impact of golf and health studies.
Article in British journal of sports medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Golf and Health, More than 18 Holes-A Bibliometric Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe dissemination of research, and evaluation of its impact is an increasing priority for the scientific community and funders. We take the topic of golf and health and aim to outline processes that may contribute to improved research uptake, use and impact proposing a research impact (RI) tool. We then evaluate our published research using the Research Contributions Framework (RCF).
methodsBuilding on existing research and frameworks we i) assessed the need for, ii) carried out and iii) published research, before iv) creating digital resources, v) sharing these resources widely and vi) evaluating our research.To evaluate uptake, use and impact of our three principal golf and health research outputs, we performed a contributions analysis, using the RCF first proposed by Morton. RESULTS/DISCUSSION: We developed a specific six-step Research Impact tool. Having implemented this, research uptake and use included over 300 press articles, a dedicated website and social media channels. Golf's global industry leadership dispersed information across >150 countries, embedded golf and health into curricula for industry professionals and used leading tournaments to promote health. National policy makers hosted dedicated meetings regarding golf and health and began to implement policy change.
conclusionTo date, strong uptake and use can be demonstrated for these studies, while a final contribution to impact requires further time to determine.Frameworks we used aiming to maximise impact (Research Impact tool) and evaluate its contribution to uptake, use and impact (Research Contribution Framework) could potentially add value to public health/sports medicine researchers.
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.