Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34228016›Full record

ArticleMedical care2021

Implementation of Complex Interventions: Lessons Learned From the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute Transitional Care Portfolio.

Sabina B Gesell, Janet Prvu Bettger, Raymona H Lawrence, Jing Li, Jeanne Hoffman, Barbara J Lutz, Corita Grudzen, Anna M Johnson, Jerry A Krishnan, Lewis L Hsu and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical care, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Implementation Fidelity of the Transitional Care Model: A Mixed Methods Study.Global implementation research and applications · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Sabina B GesellDepartment of Social Sciences and Health Policy.
Janet Prvu BettgerDuke University School of Medicine, Duke Roybal Center on Aging, Durham, NC.
Raymona H LawrenceDepartment Health Policy and Community Health, Jiann Ping Hsu College of Public Health, Georgia Southern University, Statesboro, GA.
Jing LiDepartment of Internal Medicine, Center for Health Services Research (CHSR), University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY.
Jeanne HoffmanDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA.
Barbara J LutzSchool of Nursing, University of North Carolina-Wilmington, Wilmington, NC.
Corita GrudzenRonald O. Perelman Department of Emergency Medicine, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY.
Anna M JohnsonDepartment of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC.
Jerry A KrishnanInstitute for Healthcare Delivery Design, Office of the Vice Chancellor for Health Affairs.
Lewis L HsuDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL.
Dorien ZwartDepartment of General Practice, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Mark V WilliamsDepartment of Internal Medicine, Center for Health Services Research, University of Kentucky HealthCare, Lexington, KY.
Jeffrey L SchnipperBrigham Health Hospital Medicine Unit and Division of General Internal Medicine and Primary Care, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite the well-documented risks to patient safety associated with transitions from one care setting to another, health care organizations struggle to identify which interventions to implement. Multiple strategies are often needed, and studying the effectiveness of these complex interventions is challenging.

objectiveThe objective of this study was to present lessons learned in implementing and evaluating complex transitional care interventions in routine clinical care. RESEARCH

designNine transitional care study teams share important common lessons in designing complex interventions with stakeholder engagement, implementation, and evaluation under pragmatic conditions (ie, using only existing resources), and disseminating findings in outlets that reach policy makers and the people who could ultimately benefit from the research.

resultsLessons learned serve as a guide for future studies in 3 areas: (1) Delineating the function (intended purpose) versus form (prespecified modes of delivery of the intervention); (2) Evaluating both the processes supporting implementation and the impact of adaptations; and (3) Engaging stakeholders in the design and delivery of the intervention and dissemination of study results.

conclusionThese lessons can help guide future pragmatic studies of care transitions.

Indexed as

Patient Outcome AssessmentAcademies and InstitutesHealth Services ResearchHumansImplementation SciencePatient SafetyQuality Assurance, Health CareTransitional Care

Identifiers

PMID34228016
PMCPMC8263141

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.