PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: Implementation science seeks to produce generalizable knowledge on strategies that promote the adoption and sustained use of evidence-based innovations. Literature reviews on specific implementation strategies can help us understand how they are conceptualized and applied, synthesize findings, and identify knowledge gaps. Although rigorous literature reviews can advance scientific knowledge and facilitate theory development, they are time-consuming and costly to produce. Improving the efficiency of literature review processes and reducing redundancy of effort is especially important for this rapidly developing field. We sought to amass relevant literature on one increasingly used evidence-based strategy, implementation facilitation (IF), as a publicly available resource.
UNASSIGNED: We conducted a rigorous systematic search of PubMed, CINAHL, and Web of Science citation databases for peer-reviewed, English-language articles with \"facilitation\" and a combination of other terms published from January 1996 to December 2021. We searched bibliographies of articles published from 1996 to 2015 and identified articles during the full text review that reported on the same study. Two authors screened 3,168 abstracts. After establishing inter-rater reliability, they individually conducted full-text review of 786 relevant articles. A multidisciplinary team of investigators provided recommendations for preparing and disseminating the literature collection.
UNASSIGNED: The literature collection is comprised of 510 articles. It includes 277 empirical studies of IF and 77 other articles, including conceptual/theoretical articles, literature reviews, debate papers and descriptions of large-scale clinical initiatives. Over half of the articles were published between 2017 and 2021. The collection is publicly available as an Excel file and as an xml file that can be imported into reference management software.
UNASSIGNED: We created a publicly accessible collection of literature about the application of IF to implement evidence-based innovations in healthcare. The comprehensiveness of this collection has the potential to maximize efficiency and minimize redundancy in scientific inquiry about this strategy. Scientists and practitioners can use the collection to more rapidly identify developments in the application of IF and to investigate a wide range of compelling questions on its use within and across different healthcare disciplines/settings, countries, and payer systems. We offer several examples of how this collection has already been used.
UNASSIGNED: We conducted a rigorous systematic search of PubMed, CINAHL, and Web of Science citation databases for peer-reviewed, English-language articles with \"facilitation\" and a combination of other terms published from January 1996 to December 2021. We searched bibliographies of articles published from 1996 to 2015 and identified articles during the full text review that reported on the same study. Two authors screened 3,168 abstracts. After establishing inter-rater reliability, they individually conducted full-text review of 786 relevant articles. A multidisciplinary team of investigators provided recommendations for preparing and disseminating the literature collection.
UNASSIGNED: The literature collection is comprised of 510 articles. It includes 277 empirical studies of IF and 77 other articles, including conceptual/theoretical articles, literature reviews, debate papers and descriptions of large-scale clinical initiatives. Over half of the articles were published between 2017 and 2021. The collection is publicly available as an Excel file and as an xml file that can be imported into reference management software.
UNASSIGNED: We created a publicly accessible collection of literature about the application of IF to implement evidence-based innovations in healthcare. The comprehensiveness of this collection has the potential to maximize efficiency and minimize redundancy in scientific inquiry about this strategy. Scientists and practitioners can use the collection to more rapidly identify developments in the application of IF and to investigate a wide range of compelling questions on its use within and across different healthcare disciplines/settings, countries, and payer systems. We offer several examples of how this collection has already been used.
摘要：
■实施科学旨在提供有关促进采用和持续使用循证创新的策略的可概括知识。关于具体实施策略的文献综述可以帮助我们理解它们是如何被概念化和应用的，综合发现，并确定知识差距。虽然严谨的文献综述可以促进科学知识的发展，促进理论的发展，他们是耗时和昂贵的生产。对于这个快速发展的领域，提高文献综述过程的效率并减少工作量的冗余尤为重要。我们试图积累关于一种越来越多地使用的循证策略的相关文献，实施便利化(IF)，作为公开可用的资源。
■我们对PubMed进行了严格的系统搜索，CINAHL,和WebofScience引文数据库供同行评审，1996年1月至2021年12月出版的带有“促进”和其他术语组合的英语文章。我们检索了1996年至2015年发表的文章的参考书目，并在全文回顾中确定了同一研究报告的文章。两位作者筛选了3,168篇摘要。在建立评估者间可靠性后，他们分别对786篇相关文章进行了全文审查。一个多学科研究小组为准备和传播文献集提供了建议。
■文献集包括510篇文章。它包括对IF的277项实证研究和77篇其他文章，包括概念/理论文章，文献综述，辩论论文和大规模临床计划的描述。超过一半的文章是在2017年至2021年之间发表的。该集合以Excel文件和xml文件的形式公开，可以导入到参考管理软件中。
■我们创建了一个可公开访问的文献集合，这些文献涉及IF在医疗保健中实施基于证据的创新的应用。该集合的全面性有可能在对该策略的科学探究中最大程度地提高效率并最大程度地减少冗余。科学家和从业人员可以使用该集合来更快地确定IF应用的发展，并调查有关其在不同医疗保健学科/环境中和之间使用的广泛令人信服的问题。国家,和付款人系统。我们提供了几个如何使用此集合的示例。
■我们对PubMed进行了严格的系统搜索，CINAHL,和WebofScience引文数据库供同行评审，1996年1月至2021年12月出版的带有“促进”和其他术语组合的英语文章。我们检索了1996年至2015年发表的文章的参考书目，并在全文回顾中确定了同一研究报告的文章。两位作者筛选了3,168篇摘要。在建立评估者间可靠性后，他们分别对786篇相关文章进行了全文审查。一个多学科研究小组为准备和传播文献集提供了建议。
■文献集包括510篇文章。它包括对IF的277项实证研究和77篇其他文章，包括概念/理论文章，文献综述，辩论论文和大规模临床计划的描述。超过一半的文章是在2017年至2021年之间发表的。该集合以Excel文件和xml文件的形式公开，可以导入到参考管理软件中。
■我们创建了一个可公开访问的文献集合，这些文献涉及IF在医疗保健中实施基于证据的创新的应用。该集合的全面性有可能在对该策略的科学探究中最大程度地提高效率并最大程度地减少冗余。科学家和从业人员可以使用该集合来更快地确定IF应用的发展，并调查有关其在不同医疗保健学科/环境中和之间使用的广泛令人信服的问题。国家,和付款人系统。我们提供了几个如何使用此集合的示例。
