Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Implement Sci. 2017 Feb 8;12(1):13. doi: 10.1186/s13012-017-0546-3.

Enhancing the reporting of implementation research.

Author information

1
Alliance Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, Booth Street East, Manchester, M15 6PB, UK. paul.wilson@manchester.ac.uk.
2
Department of Veterans Affairs Center for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
3
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
4
University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
5
University of California, San Diego, CA, USA.
6
Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, Oslo, Norway.
7
University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
8
Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia.
9
Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada.
10
University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
11
King's College London, London, UK.
12
University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.
13
University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.

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.

PMID:
28178987
PMCID:
PMC5299701
DOI:
10.1186/s13012-017-0546-3
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for BioMed Central Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center