Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32503592›Full record

Observational studyBMC health services research2020

A method to audit and score implementation of knowledge translation (KT) interventions in large health regions - an observational pilot study using rectal cancer surgery in Ontario.

Marko Simunovic, Christine Fahim, Angela Coates, David Urbach, Craig Earle, Vanja Grubac, Melissa Brouwers, Mary Ann O'Brien, Nancy Baxter

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC health services research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. 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

9 authors.

Marko SimunovicDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada. simunovi@hhsc.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2245-3468
Christine FahimDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Angela CoatesDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
David UrbachDepartment of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Craig EarleDepartment of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Vanja GrubacDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Melissa BrouwersFaculty of Medicine, School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Mary Ann O'BrienDepartment of Family & Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Nancy BaxterDepartment of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Funding

CIHR 119489
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAcross Ontario, since the year 2006 various knowledge translation (KT) interventions designed to improve the quality of rectal cancer surgery have been implemented by the provincial cancer agency or by individual researchers. Ontario is divided administratively into 14 health regions. We piloted a method to audit and score for each region of the province the KT interventions implemented to improve the quality of rectal cancer surgery.

methodsWe interviewed stakeholders to audit KT interventions used in respective regions over years 2006 to 2014. Results were summarized into narrative and visual forms. Using a modified Delphi approach, KT experts reviewed these data and then, for each region, scored implementation of KT interventions using a 20-item KT Signature Assessment Tool. Scores could range from 20 to 100 with higher scores commensurate with greater KT intervention implementation.

resultsThere were thirty interviews. KT experts produced scores for each region that were bimodally distributed, with an average score for 2 regions of 78 (range 73-83) and for 12 regions of 30.5 (range 22-38).

conclusionOur methods efficiently identified two groups with similar KT Signature scores. Two regions had relatively high scores reflecting numerous KT interventions and the use of sustained iterative approaches in addition to those encouraged by the provincial cancer agency, while 12 regions had relatively low scores reflecting minimal activities outside of those encouraged by the provincial cancer agency. These groupings will be used for future comparative quantitative analyses to help determine if higher KT signature scores correlate with improved measures for quality of rectal cancer surgery.

Indexed as

HumansMedical AuditOntarioPilot ProjectsRectal NeoplasmsTranslational Research, BiomedicalKT interventionsRectal cancer surgeryRegion-level KT signature scores

Identifiers

PMID32503592
PMCPMC7275399

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.