ArticleKidney medicine2022
Translating Clinical Research to Clinical Care in Nephrology: A Qualitative Study of Nephrology Clinicians.
Article in Kidney medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A qualitative study of nephrologists' perspectives on implementing a nephrology rapid response model for acute kidney injury.BMC nephrology · 2025Article
- Designing qualitative research with value in the clinical and epidemiological context: what, why and how.Clinical kidney journal · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rationale & Objective: The translation of clinical research to practice has been the subject of intense scrutiny in the efforts to identify ways to improve the uptake of findings that can enhance patient care. Study Design: This study evaluated the experience of nephrology health care providers who manage patients with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) to identify promoters and barriers to the translation of research results into clinical practice. We used inductive thematic analysis to evaluate the experience, attitudes, and beliefs of physicians in the evaluation and translation of research findings into clinical practice for the care of patients with ADPKD. Setting & Participants: Participants in a continuing education activity on ADPKD volunteered for semistructured interviews exploring their experience translating new knowledge into care for patients with ADPKD. An independent institutional review board (Solutions IRB) found the study to be exempt as an educational survey. Analytical Approach: Transcripts were coded and excerpted, and emergent themes and relationships were identified through an analysis performed using Dedoose software. Particular attention was paid to characterizing the facilitators and barriers to research translation at different levels of the health care environment. Results: Textual interpretation of data from 13 interviews showed that while well-established barriers to research translation are prevalent among health care providers managing patients with ADPKD, these clinicians also face unique challenges. Principal among these is the burden of interpreting the clinical research literature given the lack of official guidelines. Limitations: This study did not explore the translation of all levels of research, such as basic science and animal studies, and it was limited to the translation of knowledge from clinical studies. The number of participants was limited but was found to be sufficient for saturation. Conclusions: We identified factors that may either enhance or impede research translation for nephrology health care providers. These observations may help in the design of continuing education interventions to promote innovation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.