ArticleLearning health systems2023
Evaluating a learning health system initiative: Lessons learned during COVID-19 in Saskatchewan, Canada.
Article in Learning health systems, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Formal and informal science-policy interaction during public health emergencies of international concern: a scoping review.BMC global and public health · 2026Pooled it
- Evaluating health organization readiness for implementing a learning health system: a scoping review.Health research policy and systems · 2025Article
- Charting progress in learning health systems: A systematic review of 5 years of definitions, models, and frameworks.Learning health systems · 2025Article
- Developing a codebook to characterize barriers, enablers, and strategies for implementing learning health systems from a multilevel perspective.Learning health systems · 2025Article
- Addressing evidence needs during health crises in the province of Quebec (Canada): a proposed action plan for rapid evidence synthesis.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Progress with the Learning Health System 2.0: a rapid review of Learning Health Systems' responses to pandemics and climate change.BMC medicine · 2024Review
- Evaluating a learning health system initiative: Lessons learned during COVID-19 in Saskatchewan, Canada.Learning health systems · 2023Article
- Understanding COVID: Collaborative Government Campaign for Citizen Digital Health Literacy in the COVID-19 Pandemic.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- A Qualitative Exploration of COVID+ Learning Network Webinars: Healthcare Learnings at Pace in a State of Rapid Change.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Evaluating a learning health system (LHS) encourages continuous system improvement and collaboration within the healthcare system. Although LHS is a widely accepted concept, there is little knowledge about evaluating an LHS. To explore the outputs and outcomes of an LHS model, we evaluated the COVID-19 Evidence Support Team (CEST) in Saskatchewan, Canada, an initiative to rapidly review scientific evidence about COVID-19 for decision-making. By evaluating this program during its formation, we explored how and to what extent the CEST initiative was used by stakeholders. An additional study aim was to understand how CEST could be applied as a functional LHS and the value of similar knowledge-to-action cycles. Methods: Using a formative evaluation design, we conducted qualitative interviews with key informants (KIs) who were involved with COVID-19 response strategies in Saskatchewan. Transcripts were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis to identify key themes. A program logic model was created to represent the inputs, activities, outputs, and outcomes of the CEST initiative. Results: Interview data from 11 KIs were collated under three overarching categories: (1) outputs, (2) short-term outcomes, and (3) long-term outcomes from the CEST initiative. Overall, participants found the CEST initiative improved speed and access to reliable information, supported and influenced decision-making and public health strategies, leveraged partnerships, increased confidence and reassurance, and challenged misinformation. Themes relating to the long-term outcomes of the initiative included improving coordination, awareness, and using good judgment and planning to integrate CEST sustainably into the health system. Conclusion: This formative evaluation demonstrated that CEST was a valued program and a promising LHS model for Saskatchewan. The future direction involves addressing program recommendations to implement this model as a functional LHS in Saskatchewan.
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.