The impact of cochrane reviews: A mixed-methods evaluation of outputs from cochrane review groups supported by the national institute for health research

Health Technology Assessment

Volumn 19, Issue 28, 2015, Pages 1-99

  Bunn, Frances ^a   Trivedi, Daksha ^a   Alderson, Phil ^b   Hamilton, Laura ^a   Martin, Alice ^a   Pinkney, Emma ^a   Iliffe, Steve ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HERTFORDSHIRE   (United Kingdom)

^b NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH AND CARE EXCELLENCE   (United Kingdom)

^c ROYAL FREE AND UNIVERSITY COLLEGE MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIBLIOMETRICS; CITATION ANALYSIS; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COCHRANE LIBRARY; COST CONTROL; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HEALTH CARE FINANCING; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; JOURNAL IMPACT FACTOR; MEDICAL RESEARCH; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT SAFETY; PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS REVIEW ORGANIZATION; QUESTIONNAIRE; SECONDARY ANALYSIS; SEMI STRUCTURED INTERVIEW; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC); UNITED KINGDOM; CONSENSUS DEVELOPMENT; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; ECONOMICS; GREAT BRITAIN; HEALTH IMPACT ASSESSMENT; INTERVIEW; LITERATURE; MANAGEMENT; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROCEDURES; STANDARDS;

CONSENSUS DEVELOPMENT CONFERENCES AS TOPIC; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; GREAT BRITAIN; HEALTH IMPACT ASSESSMENT; HUMANS; INTERVIEWS AS TOPIC; JOURNAL IMPACT FACTOR; POLICY MAKING; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 85004009765     PISSN: 13665278     EISSN: 20464924     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3310/hta19280     Document Type: Article

References (104)

1. Ham C, Hunter DJ, Robinson R. Evidence based policymaking. BMJ 1995;310:71-2. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.310.6972.71
2. Dawes M, Summerskill W, Glasziou P, Cartabellotta A, Martin J, Hopayian K, etal. Sicily statement on evidence-based practice. BMC Med Educ 2005;5:1. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-5-1
3. Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ 1996;312:71-2. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.312.7023.71
4. Swan J, Clarke A, Nicolini D, Powell J, Scarborough H, Roginski C, et al. Evidence in Management Decisions (EMD): Advancing Knowledge Utilization in Healthcare Management. Final report. NIHR Health Services and Delivery Research programme. URL: www.netscc.ac.uk/hsdr/files/project/SDO_FR_08-1808-244_V01.pdf (accessed 1 July 2013).
5. Higher Education Funding Council for England. Research Excellence Framework Second Consultation on the Assessment and Funding of Research. Bristol: Higher Education Funding Council for England; 2009.
6. Sheldon TA. Making evidence synthesis more useful for management and policy-making. J Health Serv Res Policy 2005;10(Suppl. 1):1-5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1258/1355819054308521
7. Black N. Evidence based policy: proceed with care. BMJ 2001;323:275-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.323.7307.275
8. Pawson R. Evidence-based policy: the promise of ‘Realist Synthesis’. Evaluation 2002;8:340-58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/135638902401462448
9. The Cochrane Library Oversight Committee. Measuring the performance of The Cochrane Library. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012;11:ED000048. URL: www.cochranelibrary.com/details/editorial/3620281/Measuring-the-performance-of-The-Cochrane-Libraryhtml (accessed 20 November 2012).
10. Weiss C. Using research in the policy process: potential and constraints. Policy Stud J 1976;4:224-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.1976.tb01557.x
11. Lomas J. Using ‘linkage and exchange’ to move research into policy at a Canadian foundation. Health Aff (Millwood) 2000;19:236-40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.19.3.236
12. Campbell S, Benita S, Coates E, Davies P, Penn G. Analysis for Policy: Evidence-Based Policy in Practice. London: Government Social Research Unit; 2007.
13. Greenhalgh T, Toon P, Russell J, Wong G, Plumb L, Macfarlane F. Transferability of principles of evidence based medicine to improve educational quality: systematic review and case study of an online course in primary health care. BMJ 2003;326:142-5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.326.7381.142
14. Oliver S, Peersman G. Using Research for Effective Health Promotion. Buckingham: Open University Press; 2001.
15. Armstrong R, Pettman T, Burford B, Doyle J, Waters E. Tracking and understanding the utility of Cochrane Reviews for public health decision-making. J Public Health 2012;34:309-13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fds038
16. Carden F. Issues in assessing the policy influence of research. Int SocSci J 2004;56:131-51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0020-8701.2004.00480.x
17. Boaz A, Fitzpatrick S, Shaw B. Assessing the Impact of Research on Policy: A Review of the Literature for a Project on Bridging Research and Policy through Outcome Evaluation. London: University of London; 2008.
18. Huberman M. Linking the practitioner and researcher communities for school improvement. Sch Eff Sch Improv 1993,4:1-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0924345930040101
19. Amara N, Ouimet M, Landry R. New evidence on instrumental, conceptual, and symbolic utilization of university research in government agencies. Sci Commun 2004 26:75-106. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1075547004267491
20. Nutley S, Walter I, Davies H. From knowing to doing: a framework for understanding the evidence-into-practice agenda. Evaluation 2003;9:125-48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1356389003009002002
21. Nutley S, Percy-Smith J, Solesbury W. Models of Research Impact: A Cross Sector Review of Literature and Practice. Building Effective Research 4. London: Learning and Skills Research Centre; 2003.
22. Cochrane Review Groups supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). Commissioning Brief HTA No. 12/203. Southampton: NIHR; 2012.
23. Olsen O, Middleton P, Ezzo J, Gotzsche PC, Hadhazy V, Herxheimer A, et al. Quality of Cochrane Reviews: assessment of sample from 1998. BMJ 2001;323:829-32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.323.7317.829
24. Moseley AM, Elkins MR, Herbert RD, Maher CG, Sherrington C. Cochrane Reviews used more rigorous methods than non-Cochrane Reviews: survey of systematic reviews in physiotherapy. J Clin Epidemiol 2009;62:1021-30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.09.018
25. Jorgensen A, Hilden J, Gotzsche P. Cochrane Reviews compared with industry supported meta-analyses and other meta-analyses of the same drugs: systematic review. BMJ 2006;333:782. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38973.444699.0B
26. Buxton M, Hanney S. How can payback from health services research be assessed? J Health Serv Res Policy 1996; 1:35-43.
27. Kuruvilla S, Mays N, Pleasant A, Walt G. Describing the impact of health research: a Research Impact Framework. BMC Health Serv Res 2006;6:134. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-6-134
28. Estabrooks CE. The conceptual structure of research utilization. Res Nurs Health 1999;22:203-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-240X(199906)22:3<203::AID-NUR3>3.0.CO;2-9
29. Hanney S, Grant J, Wooding S, Buxton M. Proposed methods for reviewing the outcomes of health research: the impact of funding by the UK’s ‘Arthritis Research Campaign’. Health Res Policy Syst 2004;2:4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1478-4505-2-4
30. Ostrom E. Institutional Rational Choice: An Assessment of the Institutional Analysis and Development Framework. In Sabatier PA, editor. Theories of the Policy Process. 2nd edn. Boulder, CO: Westview Press; 2007. pp. 21-64.
31. Wooding S, Hanney S, Buxton M, Grant J. The Returns from Arthritis Research: A Report Prepared by RAND Europe for the Arthritis Research Campaign (ARC). Volume 1: Approach, Analysis and Recommendations. Cambridge: RAND Europe; 2004. URL: www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monographs/2004/RAND_MG251.pdf (accessed 1 July 2013).
32. Buxton M, Hanney S. Assessing Payback from Department of Health Research and Development: Second Report. Main Report. Research report no. 24. Uxbridge: Health Economics Research Group, Brunel University; 1997.
33. Hanney S, Packwood T, Buxton M. Evaluating the benefits from health research and development centres: a categorization, a model and examples of application. Evaluation 2000;6:137-60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/13563890022209181
34. Hanney S, Buxton M, Green C, Coulson D, Raftery J. An assessment of the impact of NHS Health Technology Assessment Programme. Health Technol Assess 2007;11(53).
35. Soper B, Hanney SR. Lessons from the evaluation of the UK’s NHS R&D implementation methods programme. Implement Sci 2007;2:7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-2-7
36. Kuruvilla S, Mays N, Walt G. Describing the impact of health services and policy research. J Health Serv Res Policy 2007;12 (Suppl. 1):23–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1258/135581907780318374
37. Lavis J, Ross S, McLeod C, Gildiner A. Measuring the impact of health research. J Health Serv Res Policy 2003;8:165-70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1258/135581903322029520
38. Bunn F, Trivedi D, Alderson P, Hamilton L, Martin A, Iliffe S. The impact of Cochrane Systematic Reviews: a mixed method evaluation of outputs from Cochrane Review Groups supported by the UK National Institute for Health Research. Syst Rev 2014;3:125. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-3-125
39. Hanney SR, Grant J, Wooding S, Buxton MJ. Proposed methods for reviewing the outcomes of health research: the impact of funding by the UK’s ‘Arthritis Research Campaign’. Health Res Policy Syst 2004;2:4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1478-4505-2-4
40. Hanney S, Soper B, Buxton M. Evaluation of the NHS R&D Methods Programme. Research report 29. Uxbridge: Health Economics Research Group; 2003.
41. Kalucy EC, Jackson-Bowers E, McIntyre E, Reed R. The feasibility of determining the impact of primary health care research projects using the Payback Framework. Health Res Policy Syst 2009;7:11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1478-4505-7-11
42. Hanney S, Davies A, Buxton M. Assessing benefits from health research projects: can we use questionnaires instead of case studies? Res Eval 1999;8:189-99. http://dx.doi.org/10.3152/147154499781777469
43. Lucas P, Baird J, Arai L, Law C, Roberts H. Worked examples of alternative methods for the synthesis of qualitative and quantitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 2007;7:4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-7-4
44. Meho LI. The rise and rise of citation analysis. Phys World 2007;20:32-6.
45. Bornmann L, Mutz R, Neuhaus C, Daniel HD. Citation counts for research evaluation: standards of good practice for analyzing bibliometric data and presenting and interpreting results. Ethics Sci Environ Polit 2008;8:93-102. http://dx.doi.org/10.3354/esep00084
46. Bakkalbasi N, Bauer K, Glover J, Wang L. Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science. Biomed Digit Libr 2006;3:7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1742-5581-3-7
47. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. The Cochrane Library 2010 Impact Factor: Frequently Asked Questions. URL: www.thecochranelibrary.com/SpringboardWebApp/userfiles/ccoch/file/ Impact%20Factor/FAQ%20for%202010%20IF.pdf (accessed 1 January 2014).
48. Bunn F. The Impact of Systematic Reviews on Health Care Policy in England. PhD dissertation. Hatfield: University of Hertfordshire; 2010.
49. Smith A. Benchmarking Google Scholar with the New Zealand PBRF research assessment exercise. Scientometrics 2008;74:309-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-008-0219-8
50. Jacsó P. Google Scholar: the pros and the cons. Online Info Rev 2005;29:208-14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14684520510598066
51. Falagas ME, Pitsouni EI, Malietzis GA, Pappas G. Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses. Faseb J 2008;22:338–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1096/fj.07-9492LSF
52. University of Bristol. Bristol Online Surveys. URL: www.survey.bris.ac.uk (accessed April 2015).
53. Weiss CH. Have we learned anything new about the use of evaluation? Am J Eval 1998;19:21–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/109821409801900103
54. McInnes E, Bell-Syer SE, Dumville JC, Legood R, Cullum NA. Support surfaces for pressure ulcer prevention. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008;4:CD001735. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD001735.pub3
55. NHS Purchasing & Supply Agency. Buyers Guide: Pressure-Redistribution Matteresses and Overlays. London: Centre for Evidence Based Purchasing; 2008.
56. Cates CJ, Lasserson TJ. Regular treatment with formoterol and an inhaled corticosteroid versus regular treatment with salmeterol and an inhaled corticosteroid for chronic asthma: serious adverse events. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009;1:CD007694. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007695.pub3
57. Cates CJ, Lasserson TJ, Jaeschke R. Regular treatment with salmeterol and inhaled steroids for chronic asthma: serious adverse events. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009;3:CD006922. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006922.pub2
58. Cates CJ, Cates MJ. Regular treatment with salmeterol for chronic asthma: serious adverse events. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008;3:CD006363. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006363.pub2
59. Perel P, Roberts I. Colloids versus crystalloids for fluid resuscitation in critically ill patients. Update of Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007;4:CD000567. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011;3:CD000567.
60. Perel P, Roberts I. Colloids versus crystalloids for fluid resuscitation in critically ill patients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007;4:CD000567.
61. European Medicines Agency. PRAC Recommends Suspending Marketing Authorisations for Infusion Solutions Containing Hydroxyethyl Starch. 2013. URL: www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/ document_library/Referrals_document/Solutions_for_infusion_containing_hydroxyethyl_starch/Recommendation_provided_by_Pharmacovigilance:Risk_Assessment_Committee/WC500144448.pdf (accessed 27 August 2013).
62. Lockhart P, Daly F, Pitkethly M, Comerford N, Sullivan F. Antiviral treatment for Bell’s palsy (idiopathic facial paralysis). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009;4:CD001869. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD001869.pub4
63. Roberts I, Shakur H, Ker K, Coats T. Antifibrinolytic drugs for acute traumatic injury. Update of Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009;12:CD004896. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011;1:CD004896.
64. Roberts I, Shakur H, Ker K, Coats T. Antifibrinolytic drugs for acute traumatic injury. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009;12:CD004896.
65. Cozzens SE. The knowledge pool: measurement challenges in evaluating fundamental research programs. Eval Prog Plann 1997;20:77–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0149-7189(96)00038-9
66. Comroe J, Dripps R. Scientific Basis for the Support of Biomedical Science. In Hugh Fudenberg H, Melnick VL, editors. Biomedical Scientists and Public Policy. New York, NY: Springer; 1978. pp. 15–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-2886-5_2
67. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Process Manual for the Quality and Productivity Programme: A Guide for Stakeholders. Contract No.: Version 1.1. NICE; 2012.
68. Waters E, de Silva-Sanigorski A, Burford BJ, Brown T, Campbell KJ, Gao Y, et al. Interventions for preventing obesity in children. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011;12. URL: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD001871.pub3/abstract (accessed 1 July 2013).
69. Stokes T, Shaw EJ, Camosso-Stefinovic J, Baker R, Baker GA, Jacoby A. Self-management education for children with epilepsy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010;10. URL: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD004724.pub3/abstract (accessed 1 July 2013).
70. Begley CM, Gyte GML, Murphy DJ, Devane D, McDonald SJ, McGuire W. Active versus expectant management for women in the third stage of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010;7:CD007412.
71. Cameron ID, Murray GR, Gillespie LD, Robertson MC, Hill KD, Cumming RG, et al. Interventions for preventing falls in older people in nursing care facilities and hospitals. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010;1:CD005465.
72. Inglis SC, Clark RA, McAlister FA, Ball J, Lewinter C, Cullington D, et al. Structured telephone support or telemonitoring programmes for patients with chronic heart failure. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010;8:CD007228.
73. Walsh T, Worthington HV, Glenny A-M, Appelbe P, Marinho VCC, Shi X. Fluoride toothpastes of different concentrations for preventing dental caries in children and adolescents. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010;1:CD007868. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007868.pub2
74. Callinan JE, Clarke A, Doherty K, Kelleher C. Legislative smoking bans for reducing secondhand smoke exposure, smoking prevalence and tobacco consumption. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010;4:CD005992. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD005992.pub2
75. Gorczynski P, Faulkner G. Exercise therapy for schizophrenia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010;5:CD004412.
76. Cook DJ, Greengold NL, Ellrodt AG, Weingarten SR. The relation between systematic reviews and practice guidelines. Ann Intern Med 1997;127:210–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-127-3-199708010-00006
77. Woolf SH, Grol R, Hutchinson A, Eccles M, Grimshaw J. Clinical guidelines: potential benefits, limitations, and harms of clinical guidelines. BMJ 1999;318:527–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.318.7182.527
78. Bunn F, Sworn K. Strategies to promote the impact of systematic reviews on healthcare policy: a systematic review of the literature. Evid Policy 2011;7:403–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1332/174426411X603434
79. Coffey A, Atkinson P. Making Sense of Qualitative Data: Complementary Research Strategies. New York, NY: Sage Publications; 1996.
80. Barbour RS. Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog? BMJ 2001;322:1115–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.322.7294.1115
81. Gillespie LD, Robertson MC, Gillespie WJ, Lamb SE, Gates S, Cumming RG, et al. Interventions for preventing falls in older people living in the community. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009;2:CD007146. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007146.pub2
82. Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, Eccles M, Falck-Ytter Y, Flottorp S, et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2004;328:1490. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/ bmj.328.7454.1490
83. Ciliska D, Hayward S, Dobbins M, Brunton G, Underwood J. Transferring public-health nursing research to health-system planning: assessing the relevance and accessibility of systematic reviews. Can J Nurs Res 1999;31:23–36.
84. Lavis J, Davies H, Oxman A, Denis JL, Golden-Biddle K, Ferlie E. Towards systematic reviews that inform health care management and policy-making. J Health Serv Res Policy 2005;10(Suppl. 1):35–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1258/1355819054308549
85. Mitton C, Adair C, Mckenzie E, Patten S, Waye Perry B. Knowledge transfer and exchange: review and synthesis of the literature. Milbank Q 2007;85:729–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0009.2007.00506.x
86. Dopson S, Locock L, Chambers D, Gabbay J. Implementation of evidence-based medicine: evaluation of the Promoting Action on Clinical Effectiveness programme. J Health Serv Res Policy 2001;6:23–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1258/1355819011927161
87. Gray V. Innovation in the states: a diffusion study. Am Polit Sci Rev 1973;67:1174–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1956539
88. Rogers EM. Diffusion of Innovation. 4th edn. New York, NY: The Free Press; 1983.
89. Gillies D, Maxwell H, New K, Pennick V, van der Wouden H, Fedorowicz Z, et al. Collaboration-Wide Survey of Cochrane Authors. 2009. URL: www.cochrane.org/collaboration-wide-survey-of-cochrane-authors (accessed 1 May 2013).
90. Ismail S, Nason E, Marjanovic S, Grant J. Bibliometrics as a Tool for Supporting Prospective R&D Decision-Making in the Health Sciences: Strengths, Weaknesses and Options for Future Development. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation; 2009.
91. van Leeuwen TN, Moed HF, Reedijk J. Critical comments on Institute for Scientific Information impact factors: a sample of inorganic molecular chemistry journals. J Info Sci 1999;25:489–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/016555159902500605
92. Sabatier PA. An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein. Policy Sci 1988;21:129–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00136406
93. Sheldon TA, Cullum N, Dawson D, Lankshear A, Lowson K, Watt I, et al. What’s the evidence that NICE guidance has been implemented? Results from a national evaluation using time series analysis, audit of patients’ notes, and interviews. BMJ 2004;329:999. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.329.7473.999
94. Ryan J, Piercy J, James P. Assessment of NICE guidance on two surgical procedures. Lancet 2004;363:1525–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(04)16180-1
95. Thomas L, Cullum N, McColl E, Rousseau N, Soutter J, Steen N. Guidelines in professions allied to medicine. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000;2:CD000349.
96. Grimshaw JM, Russell IT. Effect of clinical guidelines on medical practice: a systematic review of rigorous evaluations. Lancet 1993;342:1317–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0140-67369392244-N
97. Grimshaw J, Freemantle N, Wallace S, Russell I, Hurwitz B, Watt I, et al. Developing and implementing clinical practice guidelines. Qual Health Care 1995;4:55–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/qshc.4.1.55
98. Thornhill MH, Dayer MJ, Forde JM, Corey GR, Chu VH, Couper DJ, et al. Impact of the NICE guideline recommending cessation of antibiotic prophylaxis for prevention of infective endocarditis: before and after study. BMJ 2011;342:d2392.
99. Grimshaw J, Thomas R, MacLennan G, Fraser C, Ramsay C, Vale L, et al. Effectiveness and efficiency of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies. Health Technol Assess 2004:8(6). http://dx.doi.org/10.3310/hta8060
100. Gold M. Pathways to the use of health services research in policy. Health Serv Res 2009;44:1111–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6773.2009.00958.x
101. Perrier L, Mrklas K, Lavis JN, Straus SE. Interventions encouraging the use of systematic reviews by health policymakers and managers: a systematic review. Implement Sci 2011;6:43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-6-43
102. Dobbins M, Hanna SE, Ciliska D, Manske S, Cameron R, Mercer SL, et al. A randomized controlled trial evaluating the impact of knowledge translation and exchange strategies. Implement Sci 2009;4:61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-4-61
103. Walter I, Nutley S, Davies H. Research Impact: A Cross Sector Review. St Andrews: Research Unit for Research Utilisation, University of St Andrews; 2003.
104. Virgili G, Parravano M, Menchini F, Brunetti M. Cost-effectiveness of treatments for diabetic macular oedema: should we pay more attention to the appraisal and reporting of economic evaluations? Br J Ophthalmol 2014;4:421–2. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2013-303352