Cargando…
Assessing citation networks for dissemination and implementation research frameworks
BACKGROUND: A recent review of frameworks used in dissemination and implementation (D&I) science described 61 judged to be related either to dissemination, implementation, or both. The current use of these frameworks and their contributions to D&I science more broadly has yet to be reviewed....
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5534119/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28754140 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-017-0628-2 |
_version_ | 1783253730849718272 |
---|---|
author | Skolarus, Ted A. Lehmann, Todd Tabak, Rachel G. Harris, Jenine Lecy, Jesse Sales, Anne E. |
author_facet | Skolarus, Ted A. Lehmann, Todd Tabak, Rachel G. Harris, Jenine Lecy, Jesse Sales, Anne E. |
author_sort | Skolarus, Ted A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: A recent review of frameworks used in dissemination and implementation (D&I) science described 61 judged to be related either to dissemination, implementation, or both. The current use of these frameworks and their contributions to D&I science more broadly has yet to be reviewed. For these reasons, our objective was to determine the role of these frameworks in the development of D&I science. METHODS: We used the Web of Science™ Core Collection and Google Scholar™ to conduct a citation network analysis for the key frameworks described in a recent systematic review of D&I frameworks (Am J Prev Med 43(3):337–350, 2012). From January to August 2016, we collected framework data including title, reference, publication year, and citations per year and conducted descriptive and main path network analyses to identify those most important in holding the current citation network for D&I frameworks together. RESULTS: The source article contained 119 cited references, with 50 published articles and 11 documents identified as a primary framework reference. The average citations per year for the 61 frameworks reviewed ranged from 0.7 to 103.3 among articles published from 1985 to 2012. Citation rates from all frameworks are reported with citation network analyses for the framework review article and ten highly cited framework seed articles. The main path for the D&I framework citation network is presented. CONCLUSIONS: We examined citation rates and the main paths through the citation network to delineate the current landscape of D&I framework research, and opportunities for advancing framework development and use. Dissemination and implementation researchers and practitioners may consider frequency of framework citation and our network findings when planning implementation efforts to build upon this foundation and promote systematic advances in D&I science. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-017-0628-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5534119 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-55341192017-08-03 Assessing citation networks for dissemination and implementation research frameworks Skolarus, Ted A. Lehmann, Todd Tabak, Rachel G. Harris, Jenine Lecy, Jesse Sales, Anne E. Implement Sci Research BACKGROUND: A recent review of frameworks used in dissemination and implementation (D&I) science described 61 judged to be related either to dissemination, implementation, or both. The current use of these frameworks and their contributions to D&I science more broadly has yet to be reviewed. For these reasons, our objective was to determine the role of these frameworks in the development of D&I science. METHODS: We used the Web of Science™ Core Collection and Google Scholar™ to conduct a citation network analysis for the key frameworks described in a recent systematic review of D&I frameworks (Am J Prev Med 43(3):337–350, 2012). From January to August 2016, we collected framework data including title, reference, publication year, and citations per year and conducted descriptive and main path network analyses to identify those most important in holding the current citation network for D&I frameworks together. RESULTS: The source article contained 119 cited references, with 50 published articles and 11 documents identified as a primary framework reference. The average citations per year for the 61 frameworks reviewed ranged from 0.7 to 103.3 among articles published from 1985 to 2012. Citation rates from all frameworks are reported with citation network analyses for the framework review article and ten highly cited framework seed articles. The main path for the D&I framework citation network is presented. CONCLUSIONS: We examined citation rates and the main paths through the citation network to delineate the current landscape of D&I framework research, and opportunities for advancing framework development and use. Dissemination and implementation researchers and practitioners may consider frequency of framework citation and our network findings when planning implementation efforts to build upon this foundation and promote systematic advances in D&I science. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-017-0628-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-07-28 /pmc/articles/PMC5534119/ /pubmed/28754140 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-017-0628-2 Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Skolarus, Ted A. Lehmann, Todd Tabak, Rachel G. Harris, Jenine Lecy, Jesse Sales, Anne E. Assessing citation networks for dissemination and implementation research frameworks |
title | Assessing citation networks for dissemination and implementation research frameworks |
title_full | Assessing citation networks for dissemination and implementation research frameworks |
title_fullStr | Assessing citation networks for dissemination and implementation research frameworks |
title_full_unstemmed | Assessing citation networks for dissemination and implementation research frameworks |
title_short | Assessing citation networks for dissemination and implementation research frameworks |
title_sort | assessing citation networks for dissemination and implementation research frameworks |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5534119/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28754140 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-017-0628-2 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT skolarusteda assessingcitationnetworksfordisseminationandimplementationresearchframeworks AT lehmanntodd assessingcitationnetworksfordisseminationandimplementationresearchframeworks AT tabakrachelg assessingcitationnetworksfordisseminationandimplementationresearchframeworks AT harrisjenine assessingcitationnetworksfordisseminationandimplementationresearchframeworks AT lecyjesse assessingcitationnetworksfordisseminationandimplementationresearchframeworks AT salesannee assessingcitationnetworksfordisseminationandimplementationresearchframeworks |