Planning a Clinical Practice Guideline Revision for a Core Set of Outcome Measures in Adults Undergoing Neurologic Physical Therapy, Part 1: Assessing Dissemination and Scholarly Uptake
TL;DR
Evaluated the dissemination and use of the Core Set across the peer‐reviewed literature and identified areas for refinement, supporting the Core Set's methodological rigour while providing some suggestions for improvement.
Abstract
ABSTRACT Introduction Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) facilitate evidence‐based decision‐making and standardising care, yet their dissemination and scholarly uptake vary widely. The Core Set of Outcome Measures for Adults With Neurologic Conditions Undergoing Rehabilitation CPG (Core Set) has been broadly referenced within neurologic physical therapy. As the next revision approaches, understanding its scholarly influence, citation patterns, and published feedback is essential. This study evaluated the dissemination and use of the Core Set across the peer‐reviewed literature and identified areas for refinement. Methods A medical librarian conducted comprehensive searches of Web of Science, CINAHL, and Scopus to identify peer‐reviewed English‐language articles citing the Core Set between July 1, 2018, and July 31, 2024. Reviewer pairs screened articles and extracted publication characteristics, citation context using an adapted Rabin et al. and Field et al. framework, and narrative feedback. Quantitative data were summarised descriptively. Constructive and positive feedback were thematically coded. Altmetric Attention Score, PlumX captures, and Mendeley readership data characterised broader dissemination and engagement. Results Of 388 records, 176 articles met inclusion criteria. Most articles cited the Core Set once (n = 106), most frequently in the introduction (n = 70) or methods (n = 65). Thirty‐two percent (n = 57) reported that the Core Set informed study design, guided outcome measure selection, or was implemented in practice. Studies represented 30 countries, with the United States contributing the largest proportion (n = 104). Constructive feedback (14 articles) highlighted needs related to standardisation procedures, diagnosis‐specific applicability, construct coverage, and feasibility. Positive feedback (9 articles) emphasised methodological clarity, usability, and clinical value. Dissemination indicators demonstrated broad engagement, including an Altmetric Attention Score of 60, 261 scholarly citations, 643 PlumX captures, and 604 Mendeley readers. Discussion Findings support maintaining the Core Set's methodological rigour while providing some suggestions for improvement.