Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35287757›Full record

ArticleImplementation science communications2022

Framework for identification and measurement of spillover effects in policy implementation: intended non-intended targeted non-targeted spillovers (INTENTS).

Igor Francetic, Rachel Meacock, Jack Elliott, Søren R Kristensen, Phillip Britteon, David G Lugo-Palacios, Paul Wilson, Matt Sutton

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science communications, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Does access to quality accreditation improve health? - Patient-level evidence from German cancer care.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Frailty Alerts Reduce Waiting Time and Length of Stay in the Emergency Department.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2026
    Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Igor FranceticHealth Organization, Policy and Economics (HOPE) Research Group, Centre for Primary Care and Health Services Research, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. igor.francetic@manchester.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2481-3749
Rachel MeacockHealth Organization, Policy and Economics (HOPE) Research Group, Centre for Primary Care and Health Services Research, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Jack ElliottHealth Organization, Policy and Economics (HOPE) Research Group, Centre for Primary Care and Health Services Research, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Søren R KristensenDanish Centre for Health Economics, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Phillip BritteonHealth Organization, Policy and Economics (HOPE) Research Group, Centre for Primary Care and Health Services Research, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
David G Lugo-PalaciosCentre for Health Policy, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Paul WilsonCentre for Primary Care and Health Services Research, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Matt SuttonHealth Organization, Policy and Economics (HOPE) Research Group, Centre for Primary Care and Health Services Research, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/P026834/1Medical Research Council MR/R013314/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is increasing awareness among researchers and policymakers of the potential for healthcare interventions to have consequences beyond those initially intended. These unintended consequences or "spillover effects" result from the complex features of healthcare organisation and delivery and can either increase or decrease overall effectiveness. Their potential influence has important consequences for the design and evaluation of implementation strategies and for decision-making. However, consideration of spillovers remains partial and unsystematic. We develop a comprehensive framework for the identification and measurement of spillover effects resulting from changes to the way in which healthcare services are organised and delivered.

methodsWe conducted a scoping review to map the existing literature on spillover effects in health and healthcare interventions and used the findings of this review to develop a comprehensive framework to identify and measure spillover effects.

resultsThe scoping review identified a wide range of different spillover effects, either experienced by agents not intentionally targeted by an intervention or representing unintended effects for targeted agents. Our scoping review revealed that spillover effects tend to be discussed in papers only when they are found to be statistically significant or might account for unexpected findings, rather than as a pre-specified feature of evaluation studies. This hinders the ability to assess all potential implications of a given policy or intervention. We propose a taxonomy of spillover effects, classified based on the outcome and the unit experiencing the effect: within-unit, between-unit, and diagonal spillover effects. We then present the INTENTS framework: Intended Non-intended TargEted Non-Targeted Spillovers. The INTENTS framework considers the units and outcomes which may be affected by an intervention and the mechanisms by which spillover effects are generated.

conclusionsThe INTENTS framework provides a structured guide for researchers and policymakers when considering the potential effects that implementation strategies may generate, and the steps to take when designing and evaluating such interventions. Application of the INTENTS framework will enable spillover effects to be addressed appropriately in future evaluations and decision-making, ensuring that the full range of costs and benefits of interventions are correctly identified.

Indexed as

EvaluationHealthcare economics and organisationsHealth policyProgramme evaluationSpillover effectsUnintended effects

Identifiers

PMID35287757
PMCPMC8919154

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.