Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34228020›Full record

ReviewMedical care2021

Catalyzing the Translation of Patient-Centered Research Into United States Trauma Care Systems: A Case Example.

Douglas Zatzick, Kathleen Moloney, Lawrence Palinkas, Peter Thomas, Kristina Anderson, Lauren Whiteside, Deepika Nehra, Eileen Bulger

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Medical care, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

8 authors.

Douglas ZatzickDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA.
Kathleen MoloneyDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA.
Lawrence PalinkasDepartment of Children, Youth and Families, USC Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work, Los Angeles, CA.
Peter ThomasPowers Pyles Sutter and Verville PC, Washington, DC.
Kristina AndersonThe Koshka Foundation and Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences.
Lauren WhitesideDepartments of Emergency Medicine.
Deepika NehraSurgery, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA.
Eileen BulgerSurgery, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA.

Funding

NIH Health Care Systems Research Collaboratory-Coordinating Center (U24)U24AT009676 · NCCIH · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI LESLEY H CURTIS, Adrian Hernandez · 2017 to 2026
$21.5M
A Policy Relevant US Trauma Care System Pragmatic Trial for PTSD and ComorbidityUH3MH106338 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI ZATZICK, DOUGLAS F · 2015 to 2018
$5.5M
NCCIH NIH HHS U24 AT009676NIMH NIH HHS UH3 MH106338Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute IH-1304-6319
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe expedient translation of research findings into sustainable intervention procedures is a longstanding health care system priority. The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) has facilitated the development of "research done differently," with a central tenet that key stakeholders can be productively engaged throughout the research process. Literature review revealed few examples of whether, as originally posited, PCORI's innovative stakeholder-driven approach could catalyze the expedient translation of research results into practice.

objectivesThis narrative review traces the historical development of an American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma (ACS/COT) policy guidance, facilitated by evidence supplied by the PCORI-funded studies evaluating the delivery of patient-centered care transitions. Key elements catalyzing the guidance are reviewed, including the sustained engagement of ACS/COT policy stakeholders who have the capacity to invoke system-level implementation strategies, such as regulatory mandates linked to verification site visits. Other key elements, including the encouragement of patient stakeholder voice in policy decisions and the incorporation of end-of-study policy summits in pragmatic comparative effectiveness trial design, are discussed.

conclusionsInformed by comparative effectiveness trials, ACS/COT policy has expedited introduction of the patient-centered care construct into US trauma care systems. A comparative health care systems conceptual framework for transitional care which incorporates Research Lifecycle, pragmatic clinical trial and implementation science models is articulated. When combined with Rapid Assessment Procedure Informed Clinical Ethnography (RAPICE), employed as a targeted implementation strategy, this approach may accelerate the sustainable delivery of high-quality patient-centered care transitions for US trauma care systems.

Indexed as

Emergency Medical ServicesPatient Outcome AssessmentTransitional CareComparative Effectiveness ResearchDelivery of Health CareHealth Plan ImplementationHealth PolicyHumansPatient-Centered CareStakeholder ParticipationTranslational Research, BiomedicalUnited States

Identifiers

PMID34228020
PMCPMC8263139

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.