Cargando…
Dissemination of knowledge from Cochrane Public Health reviews: a bibliographic study
BACKGROUND: Appropriate dissemination of public health evidence is of high importance to ensure that scientific knowledge reaches potential stakeholders and relevant population groups. A wide distrust towards science and its findings indicates that communication thereof remains below its potential....
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10318803/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37400880 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-023-02272-8 |
_version_ | 1785068119150034944 |
---|---|
author | Helmer, Stefanie Maria Matthias, Katja Mergenthal, Lea Reimer, Mia De Santis, Karina Karolina |
author_facet | Helmer, Stefanie Maria Matthias, Katja Mergenthal, Lea Reimer, Mia De Santis, Karina Karolina |
author_sort | Helmer, Stefanie Maria |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Appropriate dissemination of public health evidence is of high importance to ensure that scientific knowledge reaches potential stakeholders and relevant population groups. A wide distrust towards science and its findings indicates that communication thereof remains below its potential. Cochrane Public Health provides an important source of high-quality scientific evidence in the field of public health via reviews with systematic methodology. The aims of this study were to identify (1) dissemination strategies and (2) stakeholders of Cochrane Public Health reviews. METHODS: This is a bibliographic study with a cross-sectional design. All 68 records (reviews or review protocols) listed on the Cochrane Public Health website (https://ph.cochrane.org/cph-reviews-and-topics) up to 8 March 2022 were included. Record characteristics, dissemination strategies, and potential stakeholder details were coded by one author, and 10% of records were checked by another author. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics or narratively into common themes. RESULTS: The 68 records were published between 2010 and 2022 and included 15 review protocols and 53 reviews with systematic methodology (46 systematic, 6 rapid, and 1 scoping review). All 53 reviews were disseminated via open-access plain language summaries (PLS) in English with translations into 3–13 other languages. Other dissemination strategies included information on Cochrane websites (e.g., clinical answers or guidelines) available for 41/53 reviews and Cochrane news or blogs that mentioned 19/53 reviews. Overall, 23/68 records mentioned the actual stakeholder involvement in review production, protocol development, or formulation of dissemination plans. The potential stakeholders included several highly diverse groups, such as the general population or specific communities (e.g., racial minority groups), policy and decision makers, and researchers and professionals in various fields (e.g., nutrition, physical activity, education, or care). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that Cochrane Public Health reviews are disseminated predominantly via PLS in different languages and via review information on Cochrane websites. Planned dissemination strategies were rarely reported although actual stakeholders were involved in the planning and production of some reviews. The relevance of Cochrane Public Health reviews for non-academic stakeholders and the general population highlights the need for the dissemination of evidence from such reviews beyond academia. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: The study was prospectively registered at the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/ga9pt/). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13643-023-02272-8. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10318803 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-103188032023-07-05 Dissemination of knowledge from Cochrane Public Health reviews: a bibliographic study Helmer, Stefanie Maria Matthias, Katja Mergenthal, Lea Reimer, Mia De Santis, Karina Karolina Syst Rev Research BACKGROUND: Appropriate dissemination of public health evidence is of high importance to ensure that scientific knowledge reaches potential stakeholders and relevant population groups. A wide distrust towards science and its findings indicates that communication thereof remains below its potential. Cochrane Public Health provides an important source of high-quality scientific evidence in the field of public health via reviews with systematic methodology. The aims of this study were to identify (1) dissemination strategies and (2) stakeholders of Cochrane Public Health reviews. METHODS: This is a bibliographic study with a cross-sectional design. All 68 records (reviews or review protocols) listed on the Cochrane Public Health website (https://ph.cochrane.org/cph-reviews-and-topics) up to 8 March 2022 were included. Record characteristics, dissemination strategies, and potential stakeholder details were coded by one author, and 10% of records were checked by another author. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics or narratively into common themes. RESULTS: The 68 records were published between 2010 and 2022 and included 15 review protocols and 53 reviews with systematic methodology (46 systematic, 6 rapid, and 1 scoping review). All 53 reviews were disseminated via open-access plain language summaries (PLS) in English with translations into 3–13 other languages. Other dissemination strategies included information on Cochrane websites (e.g., clinical answers or guidelines) available for 41/53 reviews and Cochrane news or blogs that mentioned 19/53 reviews. Overall, 23/68 records mentioned the actual stakeholder involvement in review production, protocol development, or formulation of dissemination plans. The potential stakeholders included several highly diverse groups, such as the general population or specific communities (e.g., racial minority groups), policy and decision makers, and researchers and professionals in various fields (e.g., nutrition, physical activity, education, or care). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that Cochrane Public Health reviews are disseminated predominantly via PLS in different languages and via review information on Cochrane websites. Planned dissemination strategies were rarely reported although actual stakeholders were involved in the planning and production of some reviews. The relevance of Cochrane Public Health reviews for non-academic stakeholders and the general population highlights the need for the dissemination of evidence from such reviews beyond academia. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: The study was prospectively registered at the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/ga9pt/). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13643-023-02272-8. BioMed Central 2023-07-03 /pmc/articles/PMC10318803/ /pubmed/37400880 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-023-02272-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Helmer, Stefanie Maria Matthias, Katja Mergenthal, Lea Reimer, Mia De Santis, Karina Karolina Dissemination of knowledge from Cochrane Public Health reviews: a bibliographic study |
title | Dissemination of knowledge from Cochrane Public Health reviews: a bibliographic study |
title_full | Dissemination of knowledge from Cochrane Public Health reviews: a bibliographic study |
title_fullStr | Dissemination of knowledge from Cochrane Public Health reviews: a bibliographic study |
title_full_unstemmed | Dissemination of knowledge from Cochrane Public Health reviews: a bibliographic study |
title_short | Dissemination of knowledge from Cochrane Public Health reviews: a bibliographic study |
title_sort | dissemination of knowledge from cochrane public health reviews: a bibliographic study |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10318803/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37400880 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-023-02272-8 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT helmerstefaniemaria disseminationofknowledgefromcochranepublichealthreviewsabibliographicstudy AT matthiaskatja disseminationofknowledgefromcochranepublichealthreviewsabibliographicstudy AT mergenthallea disseminationofknowledgefromcochranepublichealthreviewsabibliographicstudy AT reimermia disseminationofknowledgefromcochranepublichealthreviewsabibliographicstudy AT desantiskarinakarolina disseminationofknowledgefromcochranepublichealthreviewsabibliographicstudy |