Pierre Pluye
Biographic Data
| ID | 6767959 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Pierre Pluye |
| GIVEN NAMES | Pierre |
| FAMILY NAME | Pluye |
| SIGNATURE | PLUYE P |
| AFFILIATIONS | McGill University |
| ORCID | 0000-0002-9274-7720 |
| VERIFIED | Yes |
| TOTAL WORKS | 18 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 14 |
| WORKS AS AUTHOR | 18 |
| WORKS AS EDITOR | 0 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2004 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2024 |
| H-INDEX | 3 |
Fathers and Mothers with Low Socioeconomic Status Anticipate More Benefits from Trustworthy Easy-to- Read Online Child-Related Information Compared to Other Parents
Results suggest that increasing literacy-oriented web content can lead to greater benefits among low SES parents, and that increasing father awareness and father-inclusive content can lead to even greater benefits among low SES fathers
An Overview of Reviews on Interprofessional Collaboration in Primary Care
The range of barriers and facilitators highlighted in this overview goes beyond specific local contexts and can prove useful for the development of tools or guidelines for successful implementation of IPC in primary care
An Overview of Reviews on Interprofessional Collaboration in Primary Care
This overview suggests that interprofessional collaboration can be effective in primary care. Better understanding of the characteristics of IPC processes, their implementation, and the identification of effective elements, merits further attention
Systematic Reviews of Systematic Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Studies Reviews in Healthcare Research
Conducting a review of systematic reviews can be challenging, especially when combining systematic quantitative, qualitative and mixed studies reviews. In this methodological discussion paper, we propose (a) a typology for categorizing various types of review of reviews and (b) an exploration of criteria pertaining to three existing critical appraisal tools (ROBIS, AMSTAR 2, and MMSR) to identify those that could be adapted for qualitative and mi…
Improving the content validity of the mixed methods appraisal tool
OBJECTIVE: The mixed methods appraisal tool (MMAT) was developed for critically appraising different study designs. This study aimed to improve the content validity of three of the five categories of studies in the MMAT by identifying relevant methodological criteria for appraising the quality of qualitative, survey, and mixed methods studies. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: First, we performed a literature review to identify critical appraisal tools a…
Improving the usefulness of a tool for appraising the quality of qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies, the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool ( MMAT )
The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018 for information professionals and researchers
INTRODUCTION: Appraising the quality of studies included in systematic reviews combining qualitative and quantitative evidence is challenging. To address this challenge, a critical appraisal tool was developed: the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). The aim of this paper is to present the enhance ments made to the MMAT. DEVELOPMENT: The MMAT was initially developed in 2006 based on a literature review on systematic reviews combining qualitative…
Disseminating health evidence summaries to increase evidence use in health care
OBJECTIVE: To verify whether an intervention based on disseminating health evidence summaries by e-mail to health professionals increases access to health evidence databases, and whether health professionals intend to apply the evidence received by e-mail in their clinical practice. METHODS: This quantitative study started with a survey to collect demographic data and patterns of access to health evidence databases. It was followed by a longitudi…
A Conceptual Framework for Critical Appraisal in Systematic Mixed Studies Reviews
The past decade has been rich with methodological advancements in systematic reviews, several of which were inspired by the literature on mixed methods research. Systematic mixed studies reviews—that is, reviews combining qualitative and quantitative evidence—are increasingly popular as they can provide a better understanding of complex phenomena and interventions. However, they raise new challenges, especially regarding how to perform critical a…
Convergent and sequential synthesis designs
Can we Build on Social Movement Theories to Develop and Improve Community‐Based Participatory Research? A Framework Synthesis Review
A long‐standing challenge in community‐based participatory research ( CBPR ) has been to anchor practice and evaluation in a relevant and comprehensive theoretical framework of community change. This study describes the development of a multidimensional conceptual framework that builds on social movement theories to identify key components of CBPR processes. Framework synthesis was used as a general literature search and analysis strategy. An ini…
A realist evaluation of community-based participatory research
These results add to other studies on improving the science of CBPR in partnerships with a high level of power-sharing and co-governance. Our results suggest sustaining CBPR and achieving unanticipated benefits likely depend on trust-related mechanisms and a continuing commitment to power-sharing. These findings have implications for building successful CBPR partnerships to address challenging public health problems and the complex assessment of …
Combining the Power of Stories and the Power of Numbers
This article provides an overview of mixed methods research and mixed studies reviews. These two approaches are used to combine the strengths of quantitative and qualitative methods and to compensate for their respective limitations. This article is structured in three main parts. First, the epistemological background for mixed methods will be presented. Afterward, we present the main types of mixed methods research designs and techniques as well…
Uncovering the Benefits of Participatory Research
Context: Participatory research (PR) is the co‐construction of research through partnerships between researchers and people affected by and/or responsible for action on the issues under study. Evaluating the benefits of PR is challenging for a number of reasons: the research topics, methods, and study designs are heterogeneous; the extent of collaborative involvement may vary over the duration of a project and from one project to the next; and pa…
A scoring system for appraising mixed methods research, and concomitantly appraising qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods primary studies in Mixed Studies Reviews
Comment favoriser la recherche clinique en pédopsychiatrie? Une expérience de recherche-action collaborative
Les recherches cliniques évaluatives sont trop peu nombreuses. Nous décrirons ici un processus de recherche susceptible d'en favoriser la multiplication. Nous rapportons l'étude de cas d'un processus apparenté à la recherche-action collaborative mené par un groupe de cliniciens en pédopsychiatrie. À l'aide des résultats de l'étude et à la lumière des caractéristiques des recherche-actions, nous expliquons pourquoi et comment ce groupe de clinicie…
Making public health programs last
Program sustainability
Program sustainability is an ongoing concern for most people in health promotion. However, the current notion of sustainability in organizations, namely routinization, needs refinement. This article examines organizational routines. In so doing, it refines the notion of sustainability and the assessment of routines. Drawing on the organizational literature, a routinized program is defined by the presence of routinized activities, meaning that the…
A Conceptual Framework for Critical Appraisal in Systematic Mixed Studies Reviews
The past decade has been rich with methodological advancements in systematic reviews, several of which were inspired by the literature on mixed methods research. Systematic mixed studies reviews—that is, reviews combining qualitative and quantitative evidence—are increasingly popular as they can provide a better understanding of complex phenomena and interventions. However, they raise new challenges, especially regarding how to perform critical a…
An Overview of Reviews on Interprofessional Collaboration in Primary Care
The range of barriers and facilitators highlighted in this overview goes beyond specific local contexts and can prove useful for the development of tools or guidelines for successful implementation of IPC in primary care
Systematic Reviews of Systematic Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Studies Reviews in Healthcare Research
Conducting a review of systematic reviews can be challenging, especially when combining systematic quantitative, qualitative and mixed studies reviews. In this methodological discussion paper, we propose (a) a typology for categorizing various types of review of reviews and (b) an exploration of criteria pertaining to three existing critical appraisal tools (ROBIS, AMSTAR 2, and MMSR) to identify those that could be adapted for qualitative and mi…
Making public health programs last
Program sustainability
Program sustainability is an ongoing concern for most people in health promotion. However, the current notion of sustainability in organizations, namely routinization, needs refinement. This article examines organizational routines. In so doing, it refines the notion of sustainability and the assessment of routines. Drawing on the organizational literature, a routinized program is defined by the presence of routinized activities, meaning that the…
Comment favoriser la recherche clinique en pédopsychiatrie? Une expérience de recherche-action collaborative
Les recherches cliniques évaluatives sont trop peu nombreuses. Nous décrirons ici un processus de recherche susceptible d'en favoriser la multiplication. Nous rapportons l'étude de cas d'un processus apparenté à la recherche-action collaborative mené par un groupe de cliniciens en pédopsychiatrie. À l'aide des résultats de l'étude et à la lumière des caractéristiques des recherche-actions, nous expliquons pourquoi et comment ce groupe de clinicie…
A scoring system for appraising mixed methods research, and concomitantly appraising qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods primary studies in Mixed Studies Reviews
Uncovering the Benefits of Participatory Research
Context: Participatory research (PR) is the co‐construction of research through partnerships between researchers and people affected by and/or responsible for action on the issues under study. Evaluating the benefits of PR is challenging for a number of reasons: the research topics, methods, and study designs are heterogeneous; the extent of collaborative involvement may vary over the duration of a project and from one project to the next; and pa…
Combining the Power of Stories and the Power of Numbers
This article provides an overview of mixed methods research and mixed studies reviews. These two approaches are used to combine the strengths of quantitative and qualitative methods and to compensate for their respective limitations. This article is structured in three main parts. First, the epistemological background for mixed methods will be presented. Afterward, we present the main types of mixed methods research designs and techniques as well…
A realist evaluation of community-based participatory research
These results add to other studies on improving the science of CBPR in partnerships with a high level of power-sharing and co-governance. Our results suggest sustaining CBPR and achieving unanticipated benefits likely depend on trust-related mechanisms and a continuing commitment to power-sharing. These findings have implications for building successful CBPR partnerships to address challenging public health problems and the complex assessment of …
Convergent and sequential synthesis designs
Can we Build on Social Movement Theories to Develop and Improve Community‐Based Participatory Research? A Framework Synthesis Review
A long‐standing challenge in community‐based participatory research ( CBPR ) has been to anchor practice and evaluation in a relevant and comprehensive theoretical framework of community change. This study describes the development of a multidimensional conceptual framework that builds on social movement theories to identify key components of CBPR processes. Framework synthesis was used as a general literature search and analysis strategy. An ini…
Improving the usefulness of a tool for appraising the quality of qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies, the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool ( MMAT )
The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018 for information professionals and researchers
INTRODUCTION: Appraising the quality of studies included in systematic reviews combining qualitative and quantitative evidence is challenging. To address this challenge, a critical appraisal tool was developed: the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). The aim of this paper is to present the enhance ments made to the MMAT. DEVELOPMENT: The MMAT was initially developed in 2006 based on a literature review on systematic reviews combining qualitative…
Disseminating health evidence summaries to increase evidence use in health care
OBJECTIVE: To verify whether an intervention based on disseminating health evidence summaries by e-mail to health professionals increases access to health evidence databases, and whether health professionals intend to apply the evidence received by e-mail in their clinical practice. METHODS: This quantitative study started with a survey to collect demographic data and patterns of access to health evidence databases. It was followed by a longitudi…
A Conceptual Framework for Critical Appraisal in Systematic Mixed Studies Reviews
The past decade has been rich with methodological advancements in systematic reviews, several of which were inspired by the literature on mixed methods research. Systematic mixed studies reviews—that is, reviews combining qualitative and quantitative evidence—are increasingly popular as they can provide a better understanding of complex phenomena and interventions. However, they raise new challenges, especially regarding how to perform critical a…
Improving the content validity of the mixed methods appraisal tool
OBJECTIVE: The mixed methods appraisal tool (MMAT) was developed for critically appraising different study designs. This study aimed to improve the content validity of three of the five categories of studies in the MMAT by identifying relevant methodological criteria for appraising the quality of qualitative, survey, and mixed methods studies. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: First, we performed a literature review to identify critical appraisal tools a…
An Overview of Reviews on Interprofessional Collaboration in Primary Care
The range of barriers and facilitators highlighted in this overview goes beyond specific local contexts and can prove useful for the development of tools or guidelines for successful implementation of IPC in primary care
An Overview of Reviews on Interprofessional Collaboration in Primary Care
This overview suggests that interprofessional collaboration can be effective in primary care. Better understanding of the characteristics of IPC processes, their implementation, and the identification of effective elements, merits further attention
Systematic Reviews of Systematic Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Studies Reviews in Healthcare Research
Conducting a review of systematic reviews can be challenging, especially when combining systematic quantitative, qualitative and mixed studies reviews. In this methodological discussion paper, we propose (a) a typology for categorizing various types of review of reviews and (b) an exploration of criteria pertaining to three existing critical appraisal tools (ROBIS, AMSTAR 2, and MMSR) to identify those that could be adapted for qualitative and mi…
Fathers and Mothers with Low Socioeconomic Status Anticipate More Benefits from Trustworthy Easy-to- Read Online Child-Related Information Compared to Other Parents
Results suggest that increasing literacy-oriented web content can lead to greater benefits among low SES parents, and that increasing father awareness and father-inclusive content can lead to even greater benefits among low SES fathers
Health Policy Implementation Science (12 works) · Medicine (12 works) · Computer Science (11 works) · Psychology (11 works) · Sociology (9 works) · Engineering (7 works) · Meta-analysis and systematic reviews (7 works) · Political science (7 works) · Management science (6 works) · MEDLINE (6 works)