↓ Skip to main content

Implementing guidelines in nursing homes: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Implementing guidelines in nursing homes: a systematic review
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12913-016-1550-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Heinz Diehl, Birgitte Graverholt, Birgitte Espehaug, Hans Lund

Abstract

Research on guideline implementation strategies has mostly been conducted in settings which differ significantly from a nursing home setting and its transferability to the nursing home setting is therefore limited. The objective of this study was to systematically review the effects of interventions to improve the implementation of guidelines in nursing homes. A systematic literature search was conducted in the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, DARE, HTA, CENTRAL, SveMed + and ISI Web of Science from their inception until August 2015. Reference screening and a citation search were performed. Studies were eligible if they evaluated any type of guideline implementation strategy in a nursing home setting. Eligible study designs were systematic reviews, randomised controlled trials, non-randomised controlled trials, controlled before-after studies and interrupted-time-series studies. The EPOC risk of bias tool was used to evaluate the risk of bias in the included studies. The overall quality of the evidence was rated using GRADE. Five cluster-randomised controlled trials met the inclusion criteria, evaluating a total of six different multifaceted implementation strategies. One study reported a small statistically significant effect on professional practice, and two studies demonstrated small to moderate statistically significant effects on patient outcome. The overall quality of the evidence for all comparisons was low or very low using GRADE. Little is known about how to improve the implementation of guidelines in nursing homes, and the evidence to support or discourage particular interventions is inconclusive. More implementation research is needed to ensure high quality of care in nursing homes. PROSPERO 2014: CRD42014007664.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 70 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 19%
Student > Master 9 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Student > Postgraduate 6 9%
Other 4 6%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 22 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 12 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 16%
Social Sciences 5 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 4%
Other 11 16%
Unknown 24 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 December 2017.
All research outputs
#5,546,457
of 22,953,506 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#2,387
of 7,685 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#94,594
of 365,993 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#70
of 221 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,953,506 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,685 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 365,993 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 221 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.