ArticleBMC health services research2025
Implementation science promotes clinical practice of guidelines: a scoping review.
Article in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Implementation Leadership in Evidence-Based Practice in Healthcare: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Worldviews on evidence-based nursing · 2026Pooled it
- Adaptation of a clinical practice guideline for home care nursing in heart failure patients: a multi-method study.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- District health management teams as champions for implementing the WHO LIVE LIFE suicide-prevention framework in Rural Uganda: a pre-implementation qualitative study.Implementation science communications · 2026Article
- RAPID-LC: rapid evidence-to-practice uptake of large core thrombectomy across a stroke consortium.Journal of neurology · 2026Article
- Adoption of the Reference Framework for Preventive Care for Older Adults: a study of primary care physicians.Family medicine and community health · 2026Article
- Next-Generation S3-Level Clinical Practice Guidelines in Periodontology: Methodology, Current Evidence, and Future Directions.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
- Utilization of Rapid Qualitative Analysis to Evaluate Intervention Acceptability, Usefulness, and Ease of Implementation in a Community Health Center.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe standardized professional conduct of medical staff and the consistent delivery of healthcare services depend on the continuous dissemination and implementation of clinical practice guidelines. However, a notable gap exists between guidelines publication and their real-world application, highlighting the need for robust methodologies to support evidence translation. Implementation science (IS) facilitates the adoption and integration of evidence-based practices, interventions, and policies within real-world healthcare and public health contexts. This scoping review aims to clarify how IS is applied in guidelines implementation, identify study characteristics, and guide medical staff in translating guidelines recommendations into actionable clinical practices.
methodsSix electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Scopus, were searched from their inception to July 17, 2025. Studies were selected based on predefined eligibility criteria, and relevant data were extracted by two reviewers using a standardized form. Quantitative and qualitative analyses were performed to assess research scope, trends, and characteristics. The results are presented in tables, accompanied by relevant visualizations where appropriate.
resultsA total of 8, 929 studies were identified, of which 99 met the inclusion criteria and underwent data extraction and synthesis. A bar chart illustrates the temporal distribution of included studies by publication year. The most common study designs were qualitative (n = 32) and observational (n = 13). A word cloud highlights primary healthcare topics addressed, including chronic diseases healthcare, maternal and infant healthcare, nervous system disease healthcare, symptom management. Among the included studies, 66 were multi-center. Hospitals were the predominant practice setting (n = 27), followed by primary care (n = 19). Studies primarily focused on patients with specialized diseases (n = 56). The most frequent study objectives were understanding current status and investigating barriers and facilitators. Provider teams constituted the most commonly involved stakeholder group, followed by patients and families. Reporting of constituting organizations occurred in 56.6% of studies, while 78.8% reported guidelines references. Regarding implementation frameworks, 63 studies applied a single framework, 21 utilized multiple frameworks, and determinant frameworks—particularly the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF)—were the most widely applied.
conclusionGenerally, using IS in guidelines has received considerable attention but remains unsatisfactory. There is a critical need for methodological standardization, high-quality guidelines selection and their detail disclosure, stronger collaboration among all relevant stakeholders in the application of IS in guidelines. Sustained and coordinated support can foster large-scale, high-quality, and scientifically rigorous guidelines implementation studies, thereby yielding superior implementation outcomes.
trial registrationOpen Science Frame (OSF: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/Q9RWE ).
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.