ArticleThe British journal of occupational therapy2024
Refocusing research: A mixed methods study to evaluate utilisation of the top 10 priorities for occupational therapy research in the United Kingdom.
Article in The British journal of occupational therapy, 2024. 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.
- The value of the occupational therapy workforce in primary care: A rapid review.The British journal of occupational therapy · 2025Review
- College of Occupational Therapy - Research Priority 10: What is the cost-effectiveness of Occupational Therapy services? Making the economic case for Occupational Therapy.The British journal of occupational therapy · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The top 10 priorities for occupational therapy research in the United Kingdom were identified via a priority setting partnership and published in 2020. This study aimed to evaluate utilisation of the top 10 priorities since 2020 and identify recommendations to re-focus research efforts. Method: A mixed methods approach involving evidence checking and stakeholder consultation was undertaken. Direct and selective methods were used to recruit stakeholders, including previous steering group members, who were invited to take part in 30-minute semi-structured interviews. Results: Eighty-one evidence sources were included and addressed the research priorities 127 times. Stakeholders ( Conclusion: There was strong agreement that research priority 1 (how does occupational therapy have an impact and make a difference on everyday lives?) was the most addressed; however, all research priorities require more attention. Recommendations to refocus research efforts included continuing to support priority-driven research and greater promotion of the priorities.
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.