Observational studyInternational journal of technology assessment in health care2026
Use of knowledge translation products from health technology assessment: a prospective observational study.
Observational study in International journal of technology assessment in health care, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFew studies report the evaluation of the use of Health Technology Assessment (HTA) organizations' knowledge products.
objectivesTo determine (a) the stakeholders' use of the products disseminated by the '
methodsA prospective web survey was performed. We included all participants who accessed INESSS products and voluntarily completed an online questionnaire from 1 January 2021, to 31 December 2022. For each rated product, the participants' use and intention to use were documented using the content-validated Information Assessment Method (IAM) questionnaire. Descriptive statistical analyses were conducted.
resultsA total of 7041 responses were gathered. After removing incomplete and ineligible responses, we were left with 5236 responses; 74.4 percent of responses were from women; 5014 (95.8 percent) reported that the product was relevant; of those, 4322 (82.5 percent) indicated that the respondent was satisfied; of those, 4096 (78.2 percent) reported that the product was used or had an intention to use the product. Regarding products' use (
conclusionsCurrent findings help identify audiences for targeted dissemination, guide user engagement strategies, and inform product refinement. Recommendation-containing products show the greatest uptake, particularly among younger professionals.
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.