Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31881964›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2019

Translating academic research into guidance to support healthcare improvement: how should guidance development be reported?

Simon Turner, Charlotte A Sharp, Jessica Sheringham, Shaun Leamon, Naomi J Fulop

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Simon TurnerSchool of Management, University of Los Andes, Edificio Santo Domingo, Cl. 21 #1 20, Bogotá, Colombia. s.turner@uniandes.edu.co.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1801-8351
Charlotte A SharpCentre for Primary Care and Health Services Research, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
Jessica SheringhamDepartment of Applied Health Research, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, UK.
Shaun LeamonThe Health Foundation, 8 Salisbury Square, London, EC4Y 8AP, UK.
Naomi J FulopDepartment of Applied Health Research, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, UK.
University College London · GBHealth Foundation · GBManchester Academic Health Science Centre · GBUniversidad de Los Andes · CO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is interest internationally in improving the uptake of research evidence to inform health care quality and safety. This article focusses on guidance development from research studies as one method for improving research uptake. While we recognise that implementation strategies on the ´demand´ side for encouraging the uptake of research are important, e.g. knowledge brokers and university-practice collaborations, this article focusses on the ´production´ aspect of how guidance development is reported and the consequent influence this may have on end-users´ receptivity to evidence, in addition to other demand-side processes. MAIN TEXT: The article considers the following question: how is guidance developed and what are the implications for reporting? We address this question by reviewing examples of guidance development reporting from applied health research studies, then describe how we produced guidance for a national study of evidence use in decision-making on adopting innovations. The starting point for reflecting on our experiences is a vignette of the guidance ´launch´ event at a national conference.

conclusionsImplications for reporting guidance development and supporting improvement are discussed. These include the need to (a) produce reporting standards for the production of guidance to match reporting standards for other research methods, (b) acknowledge the ´informal´ or emergent aspects of producing guidance and its role within a wider knowledge mobilization strategy, (c) consider guidance development from projects as part of a wider knowledge mobilization strategy, and (d) encourage a receptive environment for guidance development and use, including researcher training, durable funding to support impact, and closer relations between research and practice.

Indexed as

Practice Guidelines as TopicTranslational Research, BiomedicalDelivery of Health CareHumansQuality ImprovementGuidanceImprovementReportingResearch evidence

Identifiers

PMID31881964
PMCPMC6935180
OpenAlexW2998623828

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.