Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35104415›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of speech-language pathology2022

Implementation Science Research in Communication Sciences and Disorders: A Scoping Review.

Natalie F Douglas, Julie L Feuerstein, Jennifer Y Oshita, Megan E Schliep, Margaret L Danowski

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of speech-language pathology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Identifying P300 brain-computer interface training strategies for AAC in children: a focus group study.Augmentative and alternative communication (Baltimore, Md. : 1985) · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Prologue: Implementation Science in CSD and Starting Where You Are.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2022
    Review
  14. 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.

Natalie F DouglasCentral Michigan University, Mount Pleasant.ORCID 0000-0002-0728-0696
Julie L FeuersteinUniversity of Central Florida, Orlando.ORCID 0000-0002-5354-9983
Jennifer Y OshitaThe University of Vermont, Burlington.ORCID 0000-0002-2183-5969
Megan E SchliepMGH Institute of Health Professions, Boston, MA.ORCID 0000-0002-3218-2086
Margaret L DanowskiCentral Michigan University, Mount Pleasant.ORCID 0000-0003-0804-0974

Funding

Healthcare Outcomes and Accommodations for Persons with Communication DisabilitiesF31DC020118 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT & ST AGRIC COLLEGE · PI OSHITA, JENNIFER Y · 2021 to 2022
$77k
NIDCD NIH HHS F31 DC020118
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe purpose of this study was to complete a scoping review of implementation science (IS) research in communication sciences and disorders (CSD) over time and to determine characteristics of IS research in CSD.

methodA scoping review was conducted of PubMed and Education Resources Information Center for sources published in English that (a) included CSD practitioners, (b) addressed IS research, and (c) identified a specific evidence-based practice. Resulting sources were systematically examined for study aim, patient populations, implementation framework utilized, setting of the study, implementation strategy examined, and implementation outcome measured.

resultsThe majority of the 82 studies that underwent a full-text review (80.5%) were published in 2014 or later. One fourth of the studies were concept papers, and another one fourth focused on context assessment (25.6% of studies, each), 11% focused on designing implementation strategies, and 36.6% focused on testing implementation strategies. The patient population most frequently represented aphasia (21.3%), and most studies (34.4%) were conducted in inpatient medical settings. Nearly half (42.6%) of the nonconcept studies lacked an IS framework. Among implementation strategies identified, approximately one third of studies focused on education and/or training plus another strategy and one fourth focused on education and/or training alone. Implementation outcomes measured typically represented early stages of implementation.

conclusionsThis scoping review of IS research in CSD described the landscape of IS studies in CSD. IS is intersecting with CSD at a rapid rate, especially since 2014. Future IS research in CSD should adopt an implementation framework a priori and consider the broad range of implementation strategies and outcomes to support the uptake of research into typical practice settings.

Indexed as

AphasiaImplementation ScienceCommunicationEvidence-Based PracticeHumans

Identifiers

PMID35104415
PMCPMC10721253

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.