SynthesisImplementation science : IS2024
What validated instruments, that measure implementation outcomes, are suitable for use in the Paediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU) setting? A systematic review of systematic reviews.
Synthesis in Implementation science : IS, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effectiveness and Feasibility of Workplace-Based Mental Health Interventions for University Academic Staff: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Pooled it
- Assessing hospital antibiotic stewardship program (ASP) implementation: validation of an implementation science-informed survey.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsThe measurement of implementation outcomes can establish the success of implementing evidence into practice. However, implementation outcomes are seldom measured in acute healthcare settings, such as Paediatric Intensive Care Units (PICU), and if they are used, are likely to be non-validated, site or intervention-specific measures. To address this literature gap, this systematic review of systematic reviews aims to identify validated instruments to measure implementation outcomes of new EBP interventions in a PICU setting.
methodsA systematic review of systematic reviews was conducted in two phases. Phase One: Five electronic databases were searched between 06/10/22 and 14/10/22. Systematic reviews were selected using pre-determined eligibility criteria. Methodological quality was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool and a data extraction table was used to allow further synthesis. Phase Two: Secondary eligibility criteria were used to extract and review instruments from the systematic reviews selected in Phase One. Instruments were analysed and mapped to the Consolidated Framework of Implementation Research (CFIR).
resultsPhase One: Searches resulted in 3195 unique papers. Five systematic reviews were eligible for inclusion. All examined the psychometric properties of each instrument, utilising different methods to do so; three considered their pragmatic or usability properties; and one identified instruments that were transferrable to different settings. Each systematic review identified that most included instruments had limited evidence of their validity or reliability and had poor psychometric properties. Phase two: 93 instruments were screened, and nine were eligible for analysis. After analysis and CFIR mapping, two instruments were identified as potentially adaptable to the PICU setting.
conclusionsThe methodological quality of implementation outcome measurement instruments is inadequate, warranting further validation research. Two instruments were identified that cover multiple CFIR domains and have scope to be adapted for use when implementing evidence-based practice into the PICU. Further work is needed to adapt and further validate an instrument for use in practice.
trial registrationFor transparency of procedures and methods, the protocol for this systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (registration number CRD42022361638L).
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.