Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41179339›Full record

ReviewMDM policy & practice

Integrating Decision Science and Implementation Science to Inform Policy Decision Making.

Natalie Riva Smith, Tran Thu Doan, Christina T Yuan, Gracelyn Cruden

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in MDM policy & practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

4 authors.

Natalie Riva SmithDepartment of Health Policy and Management, University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2052-9433
Tran Thu DoanDepartment of Health Systems, Management, and Policy, Colorado School of Public Health, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8862-5707
Christina T YuanDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Gracelyn CrudenChestnut Health Systems, Lighthouse Institute-Oregon Group, Eugene, OR, USA.

Funding

Using an innovative quality improvement process to increase delivery of evidenced-based CVD risk factor care in community mental health organizationsP50MH115842 · NIMH · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Gail L. Daumit · 2018 to 2026
$16.2M
Refining and Pilot Testing a Decision Support Intervention to Facilitate Adoption of Evidence-Based Programs to Improve Parent and Child Mental HealthK01MH128761 · NIMH · OSLC DEVELOPMENTS · PI Gracelyn Cruden · 2022 to 2026
$843k
Developing and evaluating a decision support tool to disseminate tobacco control research and inform policy implementationR00CA277135 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI Natalie Riva Smith · 2025 to 2026
$492k
NCI NIH HHS R00 CA277135NIMH NIH HHS K01 MH128761NIMH NIH HHS P50 MH115842
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Decision science and implementation science share the common goal of improving individual and population health through choosing and providing effective health innovations at scale. In this article, we summarize a symposium we hosted at the 45th Annual Society for Medical Decision Making North American meeting. The symposium aimed to illustrate how integrating implementation science and decision science can strengthen the real-world impact and practical utility of decision science methods. The symposium was attended by 51 individuals. It included 4 presentations by early-career researchers and a moderated discussion. Presentations covered innovative work at the intersection of implementation science and decision analytic modeling and focused on policy applications because of the presenters' expertise and strong history of decision analytic modeling to inform policy decisions. The symposium's moderated discussion indicated a need for developing collaborations between implementation and decision scientists to move this type of work forward. Suggested areas of future research are modeling to identify gaps in data and considering value-of-information methods, exploring how implementation could be incorporated into simulation methods beyond those discussed in the symposium (e.g., distributional and extended cost-effectiveness analyses), and integrating implementation science into other areas of decision science (e.g., preference and prioritization research, shared decision making). We urge decision science researchers to pursue interdisciplinary research integrating decision and implementation science to best inform policy decision making and drive the scale-up of promising policies across contexts. Highlights: Implementation science concepts could strengthen the external validity and uptake of decision science methods such as decision analytic models.The symposium discussed and highlighted innovative ways that decision science researchers could integrate implementation science frameworks and outcomes (e.g., cost, reach, fidelity) into decision analytic models to be more responsive to the multifaceted considerations of policy decision making.Supporting interdisciplinary networking and collaboration between decision scientists and implementation scientists is critical to strengthen the real-world impact and practical utility of decision science methods.

Indexed as

decision scienceimplementation scienceinterdisciplinary researchpolicysimulation modeling

Identifiers

PMID41179339
PMCPMC12579145

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.