Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Background Since 2010, the UK’s National Institute for Health and Care Research has funded a policy research unit (PRU) focused on maternal and neonatal health, with a remit to build an evidence base for policy and clinical practice in this field. We explored the usefulness of the platforms Overton and Altmetric as tools to gain insight into the use of PRU research evidence in policy and practice. Methods We searched Overton and Altmetric using article DOIs to identify citations of PRU-funded articles in policy documents and clinical guidelines. We excluded citations of the research in lists of excluded evidence, academic journal articles, and unverifiable citations. To obtain a count of unique citing documents for each article, we merged multiple editions/versions, translations, and duplicates of the same document. We calculated latency from article publication date to citation date, and citation distribution over time. We also developed descriptive case studies to explore how the citing policy documents used highly-cited research evidence. Results The 110 published articles reporting research funded by the PRU received 134 unique policy document and clinical guideline citations; 43/110 articles (39%) were cited in at least one document. Most citing documents were authored by organisations based in the UK (52/134) and other high-income countries. Intergovernmental organisations accounted for around 15% of citations (20/134). The median time from article publication to citation was 183 weeks (range 0.4–575 weeks). Citation contexts varied; use of the evidence in citing documents included provision of general background information, detailed summaries of findings, and support/rationale for specific clinical recommendations. Conclusions Overton and Altmetric are useful tools for identifying and exploring the use of research evidence in healthcare policy and clinical guidance. However, citation analysis alone cannot provide the complete picture. The delay between evidence publication and use in policy warrants further investigation.

Original publication

DOI

10.3310/nihropenres.13999.1

Type

Journal article

Journal

NIHR Open Research

Publisher

National Institute for Health and Care Research

Publication Date

16/07/2025

Volume

5

Pages

59 - 59