Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34990173›Full record

ArticleThe American psychologist2021

Collaboratively maximizing the impact of human-centered design in psychological and implementation science: Reply to Proctor et al. (2021).

Aaron R Lyon, Stephanie K Brewer, Patricia A Areán

Abstract readComment
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The American psychologist, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Aaron R LyonDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington.ORCID 0000-0003-3657-5060
Stephanie K BrewerDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington.ORCID 0000-0001-5699-5121
Patricia A AreánDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington.

Funding

UW ALACRITY Center for Psychosocial Interventions ResearchP50MH115837 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI Michael David Pullmann · 2018 to 2026
$18.2M
Brief Online Training (BOLT) for Routine Outcome Monitoring: A Low-Cost and Scalable Minimal Intervention Necessary for Change in School Mental HealthR34MH109605 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI LYON, AARON ROBERT, MCCAULEY, ELIZABETH · 2017 to 2019
$789k
Integrating implementation science and cultural adaptation to understand intervention modifications within school-based mental healthF32MH116623 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI BREWER, STEPHANIE K · 2018 to 2020
$198k
NIMH NIH HHS F32 MH116623NIMH NIH HHS P50 MH115837NIMH NIH HHS R34 MH109605
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Proctor et al.'s (2021) comment "Division 21 Has Been Devoted to Human-Centered Design Since the 1950s" on our article (Lyon et al., 2020) is a welcome addition and useful touchpoint surrounding the historical and current relationship between human-centered design and psychological science. "Siloing" in psychology inhibits the progress of the discipline. We offer a set of recommendations for reducing silos and increasing the integration of engineering psychology with implementation science to advance human-centered design and the use of research evidence in practice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Indexed as

Implementation ScienceHumans

Identifiers

PMID34990173
PMCPMC8820260

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.