ArticleHealth information and libraries journal2025
Developing an online knowledge sharing platform and community of practice for health professionals: Experiences from C-WorKS developed in North East England and Yorkshire during COVID-19.
Article in Health information and libraries journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Chinese Mobile Health Apps for Preventing and Managing Pelvic Floor Dysfunction: Quality Assessment and Content Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Developing an online knowledge sharing platform and community of practice for health professionals: Experiences from C-WorKS developed in North East England and Yorkshire during COVID-19.Health information and libraries journal · 2025Article
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
Abstract
backgroundAlthough knowledge sharing online has been recognised as an important strategy for health professionals to apply research findings to their practice, limited research exists on how to develop and implement these platforms to help facilitate collaboration and knowledge sharing.
objectivesThis study evaluated an online knowledge sharing platform and community of practice developed in the North East of England and Yorkshire during COVID-19 to support UK health and care professionals to reduce the impact of the wider consequences of COVID-19.
methodsSemi-structured interviews with stakeholders (n = 8) and users of C-WorKS (n = 13), followed by an online survey (n = 19) among a wider group of users to analyse knowledge use.
resultsInterview and survey findings highlighted several strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats to support future development of online knowledge sharing platforms. DISCUSSION: Online knowledge sharing supports six 'pillars' of successful research and innovation partnerships. This requires distributed forms of leadership and linking of different knowledge sharing strategies, and careful combination of platforms with communities of practice.
conclusionOnline knowledge sharing provides pragmatic and timely strategies for health professionals in the UK to apply research evidence to their practice. Our study provides generalisable, practical insights in how to develop and implement a knowledge sharing platform.
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.