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

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.;
implementation science 2016 Vol. 11 pp. 1-20
232
c.2016implementationbarriers

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.

Citation

ID: 274579
Ref Key: c.2016implementationbarriers
Use this key to autocite in SciMatic or Thesis Manager

References

Blockchain Verification

Account:
NFT Contract Address:
0x95644003c57E6F55A65596E3D9Eac6813e3566dA
Article ID:
274579
Unique Identifier:
doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0370-1
Network:
Scimatic Chain (ID: 481)
Loading...
Blockchain Readiness Checklist
Authors
Abstract
Journal Name
Year
Title
5/5
Creates 1,000,000 NFT tokens for this article
Token Features:
  • ERC-1155 Standard NFT
  • 1 Million Supply per Article
  • Transferable via MetaMask
  • Permanent Blockchain Record
Blockchain QR Code
Scan with Saymatik Web3.0 Wallet

Saymatik Web3.0 Wallet