4.5 Article

Standards for Reporting Implementation Studies (StaRI) Statement

期刊

BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL
卷 356, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.i6795

关键词

-

资金

  1. Asthma UK Centre for Applied Research [AC-2012-01]
  2. Chief Scientist Office, Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates [PCRCA_08_01]
  3. Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, Queen Mary University of London
  4. PRISMS team NIHR HSDR Grant [11/1014/04]
  5. National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) North Thames at Bart's Health NHS Trust
  6. Farr Institute
  7. Asthma UK [AUK-AC-2012-01] Funding Source: researchfish
  8. Chief Scientist Office [PCRCA/08/01] Funding Source: researchfish
  9. National Institute for Health Research [11/1014/04] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Implementation studies are often poorly reported and indexed, reducing their potential to inform initiatives to improve healthcare services. The Standards for Reporting Implementation Studies (StaRI) initiative aimed to develop guidelines for transparent and accurate reporting of implementation studies. Informed by the findings of a systematic review and a consensus-building e-Delphi exercise, an international working group of implementation science experts discussed and agreed the StaRI Checklist comprising 27 items. It prompts researchers to describe both the implementation strategy (techniques used to promote implementation of an underused evidence-based intervention) and the effectiveness of the intervention that was being implemented. An accompanying Explanation and Elaboration document (published in BMJ Open, doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013318) details each of the items, explains the rationale, and provides examples of good reporting practice. Adoption of StaRI will improve the reporting of implementation studies, potentially facilitating translation of research into practice and improving the health of individuals and populations.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据