ArticleHealth research policy and systems2026
A rapid tool for understanding how knowledge users engage with research findings in research-for-development contexts.
Article in Health research policy and systems, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Promoting the use of research findings in development projects is essential but often overlooked during study design. Existing frameworks for research use tend to focus on clinical settings and offer questionable applicability to development contexts, which are typically nonlinear, dynamic and cross-sectoral. As a result, there remains a gap in tools that can capture how evidence is intended to be applied by diverse knowledge users in real-world development settings. To address this gap, and drawing on over a decade of experience implementing research-to-action strategies, our objective is to develop a simple research uptake and use tool to better understand and support the use of evidence in research-for-development. We piloted the tool immediately after or 1 month following dissemination workshops, engaging 206 participants across nine sessions in five countries - Kenya, Ethiopia, Bangladesh, Malawi, and Vietnam - to gather insights on which evidence was most relevant, how participants intended to apply it and why they valued it. Although conceptualized with a focus on agriculture and global health research, this framework is broadly applicable across the wider development sector in low- and middle-income countries.
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.