ArticleBMJ open2024
Context, mechanisms and community engagement in implementation strategies: a systematic review protocol of implementation strategies designed using implementation mapping.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionImplementation Mapping (IM) has increasingly been used for the design and/or selection and tailoring implementation strategies to promote the effective translation of evidence-based interventions into practice. IM is a tool for guiding the systematic, iterative, step-by-step design process that helps guide the co-creation of theory-based, evidence-informed implementation strategies. This protocol aims to describe the methods of the planned systematic review that will (1) examine the overall landscape of IM in developing implementation strategies, (2) explore the mechanisms of implementation strategies developed using IM and (3) investigate the use of IM and community engagement in the development of implementation strategies. This review will produce synthesised evidence that will describe how IM has been used in selecting, designing and tailoring implementation strategies, with a focus on implementation mechanism and community engagement. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will include peer-reviewed original English articles that describe the use of Implementation Mapping or Intervention Mapping to design implementation strategies. We will search Medline Ovid, PsycInfo, Embase, CINAHL and Web of Science using the following terms: 'Implementation Mapping' and 'Intervention Mapping'. At least two reviewers will independently screen the records to examine the eligibility. After several rounds of consistency testing of data extraction among at least two reviewers and confirming the consistent coding among the reviewer team, one coder will proceed with the data extraction. In case of uncertainty, we will reach a consensus through interactive reviewers' meetings and in consultation with a senior author. We examined the risk of bias in individual studies using the quality assessment tool developed by Hawker ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was not required. Findings will be shared via peer-reviewed journals, and data from the included studies will be made openly accessible.
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.