ArticleBundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz2021
[Promotion of physical activity among the elderly as an example of knowledge translation: How do scientific findings enter community practice?]
Article in Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Digital Technologies for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention in Older People: Protocol for a Scoping Review.JMIR research protocols · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundScientific findings can be an important source of knowledge for public health stakeholders involved in promoting physical activity, but several barriers hinder their use. Knowledge translation can simplify this process, but it requires the understanding of the stakeholder's needs.
objectivesThis qualitative study aims to describe how public health stakeholders access information and scientific findings, identify possible barriers, and highlight the needs of stakeholders in terms of presentation and processing. MATERIALS AND
methodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted with twelve local- and state-level stakeholders from North Rhine-Westphalia, Saxony-Anhalt, and Thuringia working in the area of physical activity promotion. The interviewees were selected through purposive sampling. The interviews were evaluated using qualitative content analysis.
resultsThe benefits of scientific findings are emphasized by the interviewees, but a lack of resources in combination with a flood of information, high complexity, and technical jargon complicate their application. There is a need for tailored preparation in the form of summaries, filter functions, elaboration of practice-relevant elements, and ways of provision.
conclusionsTo achieve successful knowledge translation, collaboration and interactive exchange between researchers, policymakers, and practice as well as a demand-oriented processing of scientific findings are central. Networking and bundling of knowledge on a platform are important tasks for the future.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.