Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40572054›Full record

ReviewEvaluation & the health professions2026

Exploring Stakeholder Involvement in Intervention Implementation Studies: Systematic Evidence Synthesis With an Evidence Gap Map Approach.

Kristina Arnahoutova, Sabina De Geest, Juliane Mielke, Annette Boaz, Helene Schoemans, Sabine Valenta

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Evaluation & the health professions, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
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

6 authors.

Kristina ArnahoutovaDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health, Academic Centre for Nursing and Midwifery, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Sabina De GeestDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health, Academic Centre for Nursing and Midwifery, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Juliane MielkeNursing Science, Department of Public Health, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-9771-2383
Annette BoazHealth and Social Care Workforce Research Unit, The Policy Institute, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0557-1294
Helene SchoemansDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health, Academic Centre for Nursing and Midwifery, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-7568-8239
Sabine ValentaNursing Science, Department of Public Health, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-5598-9579

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Stakeholder involvement (SI) is essential for effective and sustainable intervention implementation, yet practical guidance is lacking. This study mapped SI use in implementation science studies, identified gaps, and proposed a practical framework for improved SI planning. Using an evidence gap map approach, this study built on Mielke et al.'s (2022) methodology, which identified implementation studies from 2015-2020. The search was updated to include studies from 2021-2023 from PubMed, using the same search strategy and inclusion criteria. Data extraction followed the Guidance for Reporting on Involvement of Patients and the Public reporting checklist. From 10,184 studies, a random sample of 2,005 was screened, adding 162 implementation science studies to Mielke et al.'s 110, totaling 272 studies for SI analysis. SI was reported in 89% of studies, but often lacked depth and strategic planning. Stakeholders were mainly engaged during the preparatory phase. Most studies involved micro- and meso-level stakeholders, rarely including macro-level stakeholders. Few described stakeholder selection or preparation. SI was mostly consultative, via interviews, surveys, and focus groups, with limited active collaboration. SI processes and costs were rarely evaluated. Our findings underscore the need for structured, comprehensive SI planning and offer practical recommendations to strengthen SI efforts in implementation research.

Indexed as

Implementation ScienceStakeholder ParticipationEvidence GapsHumansevidence gap mapimplementation scienceinvolvement and engagementresearch involvementstakeholder engagementstakeholder involvement

Identifiers

PMID40572054
PMCPMC13069137

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.