Enhancing the reporting of implementation research

Paul M Wilson; Anne Sales; Michel Wensing; Gregory A Aarons; Signe Flottorp; Liz Glidewell; Alison M. Hutchinson; Justin Presseau; Anne Rogers; Nick Sevdalis; Janet Squires; Sharon E Straus

doi:10.1186/s13012-017-0546-3

Enhancing the reporting of implementation research

Paul M Wilson, Anne Sales, Michel Wensing, Gregory A Aarons, Signe Flottorp, Liz Glidewell, Alison M. Hutchinson, Justin Presseau, Anne Rogers, Nick Sevdalis, Janet Squires, Sharon E Straus

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

In the 10 years since the inception of Implementation Science, we have witnessed a continued rise in the number of submissions received, reflecting the continued global interest in methods to enhance the uptake of research findings into healthcare practice and policy. We receive over 750 submissions annually, and there is now a large gap between what is submitted and what gets published. In this editorial, we restate the journal scope and current boundaries. We also identify some specific reporting issues that if addressed will help enhance the scientific reporting quality and transparency of the manuscripts we receive. We hope that this editorial acts as a further guide to researchers seeking to publish their work in Implementation Science.

Original language	English
Article number	13
Number of pages	5
Journal	Implementation science
Volume	12
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-017-0546-3
Publication status	Published - 8 Feb 2017

Bibliographical note

Keywords

Diffusion of Innovation
Editorial Policies
Humans
Periodicals as Topic
Publishing
Research
Research Design
Translational Medical Research
Editorial

Access to Document

10.1186/s13012-017-0546-3

Enhancing the reporting of implementation research
© The Author(s). 2017
Final published version, 407 KB

Cite this

@article{5557fb5c2c744a5a84d8a53381c9e620,

title = "Enhancing the reporting of implementation research",

abstract = "In the 10 years since the inception of Implementation Science, we have witnessed a continued rise in the number of submissions received, reflecting the continued global interest in methods to enhance the uptake of research findings into healthcare practice and policy. We receive over 750 submissions annually, and there is now a large gap between what is submitted and what gets published. In this editorial, we restate the journal scope and current boundaries. We also identify some specific reporting issues that if addressed will help enhance the scientific reporting quality and transparency of the manuscripts we receive. We hope that this editorial acts as a further guide to researchers seeking to publish their work in Implementation Science.",

keywords = "Diffusion of Innovation, Editorial Policies, Humans, Periodicals as Topic, Publishing, Research, Research Design, Translational Medical Research, Editorial",

author = "Wilson, {Paul M} and Anne Sales and Michel Wensing and Aarons, {Gregory A} and Signe Flottorp and Liz Glidewell and Hutchinson, {Alison M.} and Justin Presseau and Anne Rogers and Nick Sevdalis and Janet Squires and Straus, {Sharon E}",

note = "{\textcopyright} The Author(s). 2017",

year = "2017",

month = feb,

day = "8",

doi = "10.1186/s13012-017-0546-3",

language = "English",

volume = "12",

journal = "Implementation science",

issn = "1748-5908",

publisher = "BioMed Central",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Enhancing the reporting of implementation research

AU - Wilson, Paul M

AU - Sales, Anne

AU - Wensing, Michel

AU - Aarons, Gregory A

AU - Flottorp, Signe

AU - Glidewell, Liz

AU - Hutchinson, Alison M.

AU - Presseau, Justin

AU - Rogers, Anne

AU - Sevdalis, Nick

AU - Squires, Janet

AU - Straus, Sharon E

N1 - © The Author(s). 2017

PY - 2017/2/8

Y1 - 2017/2/8

N2 - In the 10 years since the inception of Implementation Science, we have witnessed a continued rise in the number of submissions received, reflecting the continued global interest in methods to enhance the uptake of research findings into healthcare practice and policy. We receive over 750 submissions annually, and there is now a large gap between what is submitted and what gets published. In this editorial, we restate the journal scope and current boundaries. We also identify some specific reporting issues that if addressed will help enhance the scientific reporting quality and transparency of the manuscripts we receive. We hope that this editorial acts as a further guide to researchers seeking to publish their work in Implementation Science.

AB - In the 10 years since the inception of Implementation Science, we have witnessed a continued rise in the number of submissions received, reflecting the continued global interest in methods to enhance the uptake of research findings into healthcare practice and policy. We receive over 750 submissions annually, and there is now a large gap between what is submitted and what gets published. In this editorial, we restate the journal scope and current boundaries. We also identify some specific reporting issues that if addressed will help enhance the scientific reporting quality and transparency of the manuscripts we receive. We hope that this editorial acts as a further guide to researchers seeking to publish their work in Implementation Science.

KW - Diffusion of Innovation

KW - Editorial Policies

KW - Humans

KW - Periodicals as Topic

KW - Publishing

KW - Research

KW - Research Design

KW - Translational Medical Research

KW - Editorial

U2 - 10.1186/s13012-017-0546-3

DO - 10.1186/s13012-017-0546-3

M3 - Article

C2 - 28178987

SN - 1748-5908

VL - 12

JO - Implementation science

JF - Implementation science

IS - 1

M1 - 13

ER -