Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38652900›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2024

The Conceptualization and Measurement of Research Impact in Primary Health Care: Protocol for a Rapid Scoping Review.

Monica Aggarwal, Brian G Hutchison, Kristina M Kokorelias, Vivian R Ramsden, Noah M Ivers, Andrew Pinto, Ross E G Uphsur, Sabrina T Wong, Nick Pimlott, Steve Slade

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 91% of its field
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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

10 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Monica AggarwalDalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-8455-0058
Brian G HutchisonDepartment of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-0932-9729
Kristina M KokoreliasRehabilitation Sciences Institute, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-1277-472X
Vivian R RamsdenDepartment of Academic Family Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-5845-8634
Noah M IversDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-2500-2435
Andrew PintoDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-1841-9347
Ross E G UphsurDalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-1128-0557
Sabrina T WongSchool of Nursing and Centre for Health Services and Policy Research, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-9619-9012
Nick PimlottDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-6778-2567
Steve SladeResearch Department, College of Family Physicians of Canada, Mississuaga, ON, Canada.ORCID 0009-0000-7205-2078
University of Toronto · CACollege of Family Physicians of Canada · CAImpact · CASt. Michael's Hospital · CAUniversity of British Columbia · CAUniversity of Saskatchewan · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe generation of research evidence and knowledge in primary health care (PHC) is crucial for informing the development and implementation of interventions and innovations and driving health policy, health service improvements, and potential societal changes. PHC research has broad effects on patients, practices, services, population health, community, and policy formulation. The in-depth exploration of the definition and measures of research impact within PHC is essential for broadening our understanding of research impact in the discipline and how it compares to other health services research.

objectiveThe objectives of the study are (1) to understand the conceptualizations and measures of research impact within the realm of PHC and (2) to identify methodological frameworks for evaluation and research impact and the benefits and challenges of using these approaches. The forthcoming review seeks to guide future research endeavors and enhance methodologies used in assessing research impact within PHC.

methodsThe protocol outlines the rapid review and environmental scan approach that will be used to explore research impact in PHC and will be guided by established frameworks such as the Canadian Academy of Health Sciences Impact Framework and the Canadian Health Services and Policy Research Alliance. The rapid review follows scoping review guidelines (PRISMA-ScR; Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Extension for Scoping Reviews). The environmental scan will be done by consulting with professional organizations, academic institutions, information science, and PHC experts. The search strategy will involve multiple databases, citation and forward citation searching, and manual searches of gray literature databases, think tank websites, and relevant catalogs. We will include gray and scientific literature focusing explicitly on research impact in PHC from high-income countries using the World Bank classification. Publications published in English from 1978 will be considered. The collected papers will undergo a 2-stage independent review process based on predetermined inclusion criteria. The research team will extract data from selected studies based on the research questions and the CRISP (Consensus Reporting Items for Studies in Primary Care) protocol statement. The team will discuss the extracted data, enabling the identification and categorization of key themes regarding research impact conceptualization and measurement in PHC. The narrative synthesis will evolve iteratively based on the identified literature.

resultsThe results of this study are expected at the end of 2024.

conclusionsThe forthcoming review will explore the conceptualization and measurement of research impact in PHC. The synthesis will offer crucial insights that will guide subsequent research, emphasizing the need for a standardized approach that incorporates diverse perspectives to comprehensively gauge the true impact of PHC research. Furthermore, trends and gaps in current methodologies will set the stage for future studies aimed at enhancing our understanding and measurement of research impact in PHC. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/55860.

Indexed as

Health Services ResearchPrimary Health CareCanadaHumansResearch DesignScoping Reviews as Topicconceptdefinitiondevelopmenthealth policyhealth serviceimplementationliterature databasemeasurementpoliciespolicyprimary health careproductivityrapid reviewresearchresearch impactreviewsocietal

Identifiers

PMID38652900
PMCPMC11077413
OpenAlexW4395031617

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.