Search Database

KT Strategies - Search Results

You searched for records matching:

1. Citation: Wallace, J., Nwosu, B. & Clarke, M. (2012). Barriers to the uptake of evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses: A systematic review of decision makers' perceptions. BMJ Open, 2(5). doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001220
Title: Barriers to the uptake of evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses:  a systematic review of decision makers' perceptions
Author(s): Wallace, J.
Nwosu, B.
Clarke, M.
Year: 2012
Journal/Publication: BMJ Open
Abstract:

Objective To review the barriers to the uptake of research evidence from systematic reviews by decision makers.

Search strategy We searched 19 databases covering the full range of publication years, utilised three search engines and also personally contacted investigators. Reference lists of primary studies and related reviews were also consulted.

Selection criteria Studies were included if they reported on the views and perceptions of decision makers on the uptake of evidence from systematic reviews, meta-analyses and the databases associated with them. All study designs, settings and decision makers were included. One investigator screened titles to identify candidate articles then two reviewers independently assessed the quality and the relevance of retrieved reports.

Data extraction Two reviewers described the methods of included studies and extracted data that were summarised in tables and then analyzed. Using a pre-established taxonomy, the barriers were organised into a framework according to their effect on knowledge, attitudes or behaviour.

Results Of 1726 articles initially identified, we selected 27 unique published studies describing at least one barrier to the uptake of evidence from systematic reviews. These studies included a total of 25 surveys and 2 qualitative studies. Overall, the majority of participants (n=10 218) were physicians (64%). The most commonly investigated barriers were lack of use (14/25), lack of awareness (12/25), lack of access (11/25), lack of familiarity (7/25), lack of usefulness (7/25), lack of motivation (4/25) and external barriers (5/25).

Conclusions This systematic review reveals that strategies to improve the uptake of evidence from reviews and meta-analyses will need to overcome a wide variety of obstacles. Our review describes the reasons why knowledge users, especially physicians, do not call on systematic reviews. This study can inform future approaches to enhancing systematic review uptake and also suggests potential avenues for future investigation.

Copyright © 2012 Wallace, J. et al. Abstract reprinted by AIR in compliance with the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported license at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/.

WEB URI:

http://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/2/5/e001220.full

Type of Item: Systematic Review/Meta-Analysis
Type of KT Strategy: Systematic Review Synthesis/Framework
Target Group: Decision Maker
Healthcare Professional
Researchers
Evidence Level: 5
Record Updated:2016-10-05
 

Home or Search again

American Institutes for Research (AIR) logo
About AIR | AIR Topics | Contact AIR
Center on Knowledge Translation for Disability and Rehabilitation Research (KTDRR)
© 2019 American Institutes for Research (AIR).

The contents of this site were developed under grant number 90DPKT0001 from the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research (NIDILRR). NIDILRR is a Center within the Administration for Community Living (ACL), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The contents of this website do not necessarily represent the policy of NIDILRR, ACL, HHS, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government.


the National Institute on Disability Independent Living and Rehabilitation Research logo