Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33239097›Full record

ReviewImplementation science : IS2020

Integrating implementation science in clinical research to maximize public health impact: a call for the reporting and alignment of implementation strategy use with implementation outcomes in clinical research.

Brittany N Rudd, Molly Davis, Rinad S Beidas

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Implementation science : IS, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 96 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
96citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

96 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

36 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Brittany N RuddInstitute for Juvenile Research, Department of Psychiatry, University of Illinois at Chicago, 1747 West Roosevelt Road, Chicago, IL, 60608, USA. bnrudd@uic.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-9584-119X
Molly DavisDepartment of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Rinad S BeidasDepartment of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Funding

Transforming mental health delivery through behavioral economics and implementation scienceP50MH113840 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI MANDELL, DAVID S · 2017 to 2020
$6.6M
The academic-community experience (ACE): A postdoctoral training fellowship in implementation science to promote mental healthT32MH109433 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI David S Mandell · 2017 to 2026
$2.4M
NIMH NIH HHS P50 MH113840NIMH NIH HHS P50MH113840NIMH NIH HHS T32 MH109433
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough comprehensive reporting guidelines for implementation strategy use within implementation research exist, they are rarely used by clinical (i.e., efficacy and effectiveness) researchers. In this debate, we argue that the lack of comprehensive reporting of implementation strategy use and alignment of those strategies with implementation outcomes within clinical research is a missed opportunity to efficiently narrow research-to-practice gaps. MAIN BODY: We review ways that comprehensively specifying implementation strategy use can advance science, including enhancing replicability of clinical trials and reducing the time from clinical research to public health impact. We then propose that revisions to frequently used reporting guidelines in clinical research (e.g., CONSORT, TIDieR) are needed, review current methods for reporting implementation strategy use (e.g., utilizing StaRI), provide pragmatic suggestions on how to both prospectively and retrospectively specify implementation strategy use and align these strategies with implementation outcomes within clinical research, and offer a case study of using these methods.

conclusionsThe approaches recommended in this article will not only contribute to shared knowledge and language among clinical and implementation researchers but also facilitate the replication of efficacy and effectiveness research. Ultimately, we hope to accelerate translation from clinical to implementation research in order to expedite improvements in public health.

Indexed as

Implementation SciencePublic HealthHumansResearch ReportRetrospective StudiesImplementation strategy specificationPublic healthReporting guidelinesTranslational science

Identifiers

PMID33239097
PMCPMC7690013

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.