ArticleWorldviews on evidence-based nursing2025
Using Multi-Site Research Results to Impact Local Pediatric Pain Evidence-Based Practice: Innovations and Outcomes.
Article in Worldviews on evidence-based nursing, 2025. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDissemination of results following clinical trials and community-based research provides value to participants and communities beyond the intent of the primary study. Organizations participating in multi-site research may see similar benefits if local results are shared; however, it is not standard practice. Evaluation of the impact of results sharing in multi-site research is needed.
aimsTo assess the benefits of organizational participation in a multi-site pediatric pain study when results were shared, identify how sites applied local results, and the outcomes of participation, including subsequent improvement efforts and scholarship.
methodsFollowing data collection for a 12-hospital multi-site study, site research teams shared their experiences collecting the data and lessons learned. All sites received a packet with overall results, their local results, and an interpretation guide. 4 years later, the sites were surveyed about initiatives that were undertaken because of the primary study.
resultsFollowing data collection, 10 of 12 sites described unanticipated benefits of participation, including identifying gaps and strengths of documentation, generation of new practice questions, and identification of new opportunities for improvement. Seven sites answered the follow-up survey 4 years later. Most sites (n = 6, 85.7%) used their data to inform multiple practice changes (M = 2.8, SD 0.75), including changes in pain documentation (n = 5, 83.3%), assessment (n = 4, 66.7%), policy (n = 4, 66.7%), and treatments (n = 4, 66.7%). Five sites reported an average of 2.4 (SD 1.14) additional activities stimulated by participation, but not directly due to data. Three sites used results for American Nurses Credentialing Center Magnet Recognition applications. LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION: When multi-site investigators provide local data, organizations see long-term benefits, including new collaborations, quality improvement efforts, and research. Additional exploration of collaborative strategies between investigators and practice settings in multi-site research is needed for pediatric pain management and beyond.
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.