ArticleBMJ open2025
Emerging concepts and practices in health disparities implementation science in the United States: a scoping review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionImplementation science research increases the uptake of evidence-based interventions, which may improve health equity among racial and ethnic minorities. However, it is unclear how anti-racism and anti-colonialism practices have been integrated into implementation science research. The objectives of this scoping review are to describe the current conceptualisations of racism and colonialism within the USA, examine racism or colonialism-conscious approaches and analyse gaps in the operationalisation of anti-racism or anti-colonialism within implementation science studies. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This scoping review will be conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for scoping reviews guidelines. The Center for Chronic Disease Reduction and Equity Promotion Across Minnesota conceptual framework and an implementation science anti-racism lens will guide the study design and analysis. To determine study eligibility for the scoping review, articles will undergo abstract and full-text screening by two independent reviewers and discrepancies will be settled together. Data charting will be extracted from included articles by eight independent reviewers. The search strategy will use controlled vocabulary and natural language keywords related to health equity, health disparities and anti-racism/colonialism on six databases. The scoping review will include studies that applied implementation science theories, models or frameworks among US-based populations. Additionally, included studies will report any of the following implementation activities: implementation strategies, implementation outcomes, adaptations to evidence-based interventions, or evaluations of pre-implementation or implementation context. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethical approval was required for the scoping review. Dissemination will be through publication in a peer-reviewed journal and conference presentations.
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.