Barriers and facilitators to uptake of systematic reviews by policy makers and health care managers: a scoping review - Implementation Science

Clicks: 238
ID: 274579
2016
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #27 of 30 articles by views in implementation science

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Background We completed a scoping review on the barriers and facilitators to use of systematic reviews by health care managers and policy makers, including consideration of format and content, to develop recommendations for systematic review authors and to inform research efforts to develop and test formats for systematic reviews that may optimise their uptake. Methods We used the Arksey and O’Malley approach for our scoping review. Electronic databases (e.g., MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo) were searched from inception until September 2014. Any study that identified barriers or facilitators (including format and content features) to uptake of systematic reviews by health care managers and policy makers/analysts was eligible for inclusion. Two reviewers independently screened the literature results and abstracted data from the relevant studies. The identified barriers and facilitators were charted using a barriers and facilitators taxonomy for implementing clinical practice guidelines by clinicians. Results We identified useful information for authors of systematic reviews to inform their preparation of reviews including providing one-page summaries with key messages, tailored to the relevant audience. Moreover, partnerships between researchers and policy makers/managers to facilitate the conduct and use of systematic reviews should be considered to enhance relevance of reviews and thereby influence uptake. Conclusions Systematic review authors can consider our results when publishing their systematic reviews. These strategies should be rigorously evaluated to determine impact on use of reviews in decision-making.
Reference Key
c.2016implementationbarriers Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Tricco, Andrea C.;Cardoso, Roberta;Thomas, Sonia M.;Motiwala, Sanober;Sullivan, Shannon;Kealey, Michael R.;Hemmelgarn, Brenda;Ouimet, Mathieu;Hillmer, Michael P.;Perrier, Laure;Shepperd, Sasha;Straus, Sharon E.;Tricco, Andrea C.;Cardoso, Roberta;Thomas, Sonia M.;Motiwala, Sanober;Sullivan, Shannon;Kealey, Michael R.;Hemmelgarn, Brenda;Ouimet, Mathieu;Hillmer, Michael P.;Perrier, Laure;Shepperd, Sasha;Straus, Sharon E.;
Journal implementation science
Year 2016
DOI
doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0370-1
URL
https://doi.org/10.1186%2Fs13012-016-0370-1
Keywords
public health health policy health informatics health services research health administration health promotion and disease prevention

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.