Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Lisa A Bero a Institute for Health
Policy Studies, University of California at San Francisco, 1388 Sutter
Street, 11th floor, San Francisco, CA 94109, USA, b Unit of Clinical Policy
Analysis, Laboratory of Clinical Epidemiology, Istituto di Ricerche
Farmacologiche Mario Negri, Via Eritrea 62, 20157 Milan, Italy, c Health Services Research
Unit, Department of Public Health, Aberdeen AB25 2ZD, d Department of
Health Sciences and Clinical Evaluation, University of York, York YO1
5DD, e Health
Services Research Unit, National Institute of Public Health, PO Box
4404 Torshov, N-0462 Oslo, Norway
Correspondence to: Dr Grimshaw
j.m.grimshaw@abdn.ac.uk Series editors: Andrew Haines
and Anna Donald
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
Despite the considerable amount of money spent on clinical research relatively little attention has been paid to ensuring that the findings of research are implemented in routine clinical practice.1 There are many different types of intervention that can be used to promote behavioural change among healthcare professionals and the implementation of research findings. Disentangling the effects of intervention from the influence of contextual factors is difficult when interpreting the results of individual trials of behavioural change.2 Nevertheless, systematic reviews of rigorous studies provide the best evidence of the effectiveness of different strategies for promoting behavioural change. 3 4 In this paper we examine systematic reviews of different strategies for the dissemination and implementation of research findings to identify evidence of the effectiveness of different strategies and to assess the quality of the systematic reviews.
| Table Removed (Available Only in the Full Text) |
| |
Identification and inclusion of systematic reviews |
|---|
We searched Medline records dating from 1966 to June 1995 using a
strategy developed in collaboration with the NHS Centre