Mentions
Extended reach
Total likes
Video views
AI synopsis
The overall discussions strongly support the idea that there is a substantial delay—averaging around 17 years—in translating research into practice, with posts referencing specific studies, such as Morris et al. (2011), and emphasizing the urgency to address the research-practice gap. The tone and word choice—like ‘slow,’ ‘slowly,’ and ‘limiting’—convey concern and the need for reform, reflecting high engagement and perceived impact on healthcare development and policy.
Most posts acknowledge the 17-year time lag as a well-established and important finding, reflecting support for the article's conclusions.
There is high curiosity and concern about how long research takes to impact practice, showing active interest in improving this delay.
Discussions include referencing specific studies, implications for patient care, and suggestions for speeding up translation, indicating deep engagement.
Several posts highlight the significant implications of this lag, emphasizing the need for better processes and acknowledging the potential for policy and practice reform.
Good title. From 2011. This paper should have impact within 8 years. https://t.co/CRtkC7vnof https://t.co/JJYL36jN2Z
エビデンスのある基礎研究から医療実践に橋渡しされるまでのタイムラグは平均17年。23の研究レヴューから。理論と実践のギャップは、泳ぎ方を知ることと、実際に泳げることの差として哲学的問いでもあるが、17年は長い。社会の価値観の変容もそれぐらいかかるのかもしれない。 https://t.co/mqRVCaBj2t https://t.co/k8VUPIKKce
@smithECGBlog @travellator3 @PendellM This study suggests it takes 17 years for 14% of high-quality clinically relevant information to reach the patient. https://t.co/hzsIi06ADy
*Reference List* https://t.co/ath0fhPiOT
Here is the original article from 13 years ago that it can take 17 years for 14% of the information to make it to the patient. Only four years to go if we stick with the current KT model. https://t.co/uvaIh2N5Cr
@FutureDocs @jeffreylinder @abbyWUim @SocietyGIM Because of the knowledge translation (KT) gap. it can take 17 years for 14% of high-quality, clinically relevant information to reach the patient. Patients deserve the best care, based on the best evidence. https://t.co/hzsIi062O0 @NightShiftMD @SAEMEBM https://t.co/JGhB3pD7is
Ovarian cysts are among the most common reasons for gynecological consultations, examinations, and surgeries. However, the existence of ovarian cysts as a medical entity is often misunderstood. This video explains the…
This video reviews 23 studies on delays in translating health research into practice, highlighting the need for standardized measures to better understand and reduce these time lags, ultimately improving research…
@StinkRatsCharms 17 years. So I guess by 2038 everything will be just peachy for everyone who hasn't died by then! Then all they'll have to worry about is climate change! https://t.co/PG3Czs7jOo
@rbarbosa91 https://t.co/O2zr4DMVsh
@gbunny @Blindspots1983 @sarahdespres @LeaderJohnThune @SecKennedy This paper in open access, and it has a few sources (not only based on implementation science): https://t.co/BkQ0rdFxsl In any case, the exact number of years isn't critical here. The point is that it can take a long time for published research to affect clinical practice. https://t.co/ZGjU7ogiGL
RT @TheSGEM: @Charlene_Mattie @kenjaques @SAEMEBM @SAEMonline @AcademicEmerMed The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding…
@Charlene_Mattie @kenjaques @SAEMEBM @SAEMonline @AcademicEmerMed The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research https://t.co/hzsIi06ADy
@Charlene_Mattie @kenjaques @SAEMEBM @SAEMonline @AcademicEmerMed The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research https://t.co/hzsIi062O0
La #precuela 20: Morris ZS, Wooding S, Grant J. The answer is 17 years, what is the question: Understanding time lags in translational research. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. 2011;104(12):510–20.
Biomedical research - ON AVERAGE - takes about 17 years to move from bench (laboratory experiments of new knowledge) to bedside (used by recommendation in the clinic). See the meta-analysis below for detail. 5/ https://t.co/G2YamcPkkE
@Priceless20201 @EnemyInAState 12 years; Apparently the research-practice gap means it takes about an average 17 years for research to be widely used in healthcare practice, so we should expect decent C19 treatment and understanding by 2037 at the earliest! https://t.co/PG3Czs6LYQ
@hollystortholme @CounsellingSam Apparently the research-practice gap means it takes about an average 17 years for research to be widely used in healthcare practice, so we should expect decent C19 treatment and understanding by 2037 at the earliest! https://t.co/PG3Czs6LYQ
RT @TheSGEM: @smithECGBlog @travellator3 @PendellM This study suggests it takes 17 years for 14% of high-quality clinically relevant inform…
RT @TheSGEM: @smithECGBlog @travellator3 @PendellM This study suggests it takes 17 years for 14% of high-quality clinically relevant inform…
RT @TheSGEM: @smithECGBlog @travellator3 @PendellM This study suggests it takes 17 years for 14% of high-quality clinically relevant inform…
RT @TheSGEM: @smithECGBlog @travellator3 @PendellM This study suggests it takes 17 years for 14% of high-quality clinically relevant inform…
@smithECGBlog @travellator3 @PendellM This study suggests it takes 17 years for 14% of high-quality clinically relevant information to reach the patient. https://t.co/hzsIi06ADy
How long does it take for new research to make it into clinical practice? 17 years. Don't believe me? Read this: https://t.co/MeW0EnrDZO
@marcfavell @HarrySpoelstra @SammieFMc @SGriffin_Lab @BinitaKane @HelenMMGoss @DrMark_Faghy @Sunny_Rae1 17 years is what I've found (But that's an average, if governments notice the problem sooner, we might get results sooner): https://t.co/PG3Czs6LYQ
@pgoodfellow @cdtwriter @NateB_Panic We need to prepare for the long haul, the research-practice gap means it takes about an average of 17 years for research to be widely used in healthcare practice, so I'd guess the end of denial will arrive around 2040ish? https://t.co/PG3Czs6LYQ
@CovidSolidarit1 Apparently the research-practice gap means it takes about an average of 17 years for research to be widely used in healthcare practice, so I'd guess the end of denial will arrive around 2040ish? https://t.co/PG3Czs6LYQ
RT @NineDaysDead: @MarcusFitzsimon Apparently the research-practice gap means it takes about an average 17 years for research to be widely…
RT @NineDaysDead: @MarcusFitzsimon Apparently the research-practice gap means it takes about an average 17 years for research to be widely…
@MarcusFitzsimon Apparently the research-practice gap means it takes about an average 17 years for research to be widely used in healthcare practice, so we should expect decent C19 treatment and understanding by 2037 at the earliest! https://t.co/PG3Czs7jOo
It takes an average of 17 years to translate basic research findings into routine practice in the health sciences. Wondering how long it takes in the social sciences? https://t.co/99KC0ZJo3P
The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research - Zoë Slote Morris, Steven Wooding, Jonathan Grant, 2011 https://t.co/MTdbW76G9Z
@pash22 @deb_cohen @annieg76 @mgtmccartney @susan_bewley @jimgthornton @Liz_ORiordan @AnniceMukherjee @ProfJoyceHarper @PharmRJ @ProfRobHoward @seb_walsh @ajlees @LonSchneiderMD @EWidera It's the question that drives us... Question: How long does knowledge translation take? Answer: 17 years for 14% of high-quality clinically relevant information to reach patients. https://t.co/uvaIh2MxMT https://t.co/N2EffV38VE
The answer based on this 2011 study was 17 years for knowledge translation in medicine. That was only for 14% of the high-quality, clinically relevant information. https://t.co/uvaIh2MxMT SGEM Xtra Matrix Episode: SoMe for KT https://t.co/nrFGF6Fwv9 https://t.co/effZ8hxzkT
@PTPintcast https://t.co/DqS49jkZHB
@AdamDiscovers @kushogqueen @ghost_gurney @alandrummond2 @MaryFernando_ @CAEP_Docs @SRPCanada @DrLKVaughan @NightShiftMD @CanadianKayMD @TrevorJain @snewbery1 @AshleyFoxRPN @DrSimonMc I know in medicine there is a knowledge translation gap and it has been estimated it can take 17 years for 14% of high-quality evidence to reach the patient. To support that statement I provide this as evidence for my position. https://t.co/uvaIh2MxMT
@MaryFernando_ @raghu_venugopal @CAEP_Docs @alandrummond2 Thank you @MaryFernando_ @alandrummond2 @raghu_venugopal @TrevorJain and all the others who have been advocating for years. We know that there is a knowledge translation gap. It can take 17 years for 14% of high-quality info to reach the patient :( https://t.co/uvaIh2MxMT https://t.co/fMfCD6vy6e
@lcarballo_costa @aefisio Hola Lidia! Moitas grazas polas tuas verbas. Hai varias fontes sobre o dato, as máis importantes son as que sinalan vías de solución: https://t.co/BerJoxKwjo
https://t.co/MjupbdOjoz
@ArtDuCombat @michelseydur @thinkin_mkdeabh @GeekNfit @PierreElieB @Leya_MK @KineMeuh @BhengHeng @g_deville_kine @G_Rousson @NicolasAdenis De plus, le transfert dans la pratique d'une nouvelle connaissance prend du temps, mais ça dépend de pas mal de choses Le Covid est une turbo exception parce qu'il y a eu une focalisation de TOUS sur 1 sujet, mais ça peut prendre bcp plus ... 2/2 https://t.co/N6l13S9pRm
The care you're getting today is 17 years old 17 years https://t.co/Z6Lc6HZ8jJ
RT @TheSGEM: @reverendofdoubt The leaky pipe model. It can take 17 yrs to get high-quality, clinically relevant information to the patient.…
@reverendofdoubt The leaky pipe model. It can take 17 yrs to get high-quality, clinically relevant information to the patient. https://t.co/hzsIi062O0 https://t.co/PUexfrnxHT
@limits_stop There’s also this paper offering convergence on the 17 year figure and a detailed breakdown of the Whys https://t.co/yiYVOgPcDK
Read more here: https://t.co/iFHd82m568
@Hamishmcmack @NightShiftMD @SAEMEBM @JonathanEdlow @PeterJohns84 @emlitofnote @KirstyChallen @AcademicEmerMed @EmergencyDocs @emergmedottawa The majority of things in medicine can take >10yrs to be widely adopted into practice according to this publication. https://t.co/hzsIi062O0
@Laskowskak654 @PKitaDziedzic Średnio 17 lat zajmuje, aby najnowsze odkrycia medyczne trafiły do gabinetu waszego lekarza. – Źródło: J R Soc Med. 2011 Dec;104(12):510-20. The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research https://t.co/td3kMJcQzp
@Miszel1906 @NonPossumus Średnio 17 lat zajmuje, aby najnowsze odkrycia medyczne trafiły do gabinetu waszego lekarza. – Źródło: J R Soc Med. 2011 Dec;104(12):510-20. The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research https://t.co/td3kMJcQzp
Here is the original article from 13 years ago that it can take 17 years for 14% of the information to make it to the patient. Only four years to go if we stick with the current KT model. https://t.co/uvaIh2N5Cr
@yvonnezlam Oh this is very interesting, thank you! Found some tidbits from the original linked study (from 2011!) and it seems like there's still a lot of opportunity to even improve how often & how well we measure the lags from research -> implementation https://t.co/6R35K7Fr94 https://t.co/AOvrn1Gdh3
Quelle: Morris ZS, Wooding S, Grant J. The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research. J R Soc Med. 2011;104(12):510-520. doi:10.1258/jrsm.2011.110180 https://t.co/BdQrV34rPQ
@gasbagheera @SAEMEBM @AcademicEmerMed Here is the reference for the 17 years and 14% claim. https://t.co/hzsIi062O0
I’ve heard the lag between rigorous, accepted research and patient care is 17 years! https://t.co/tGmf6xDjWC If true, some obvious implications: 1) tremendous opportunity for ML/AI to assist doctors and 2) your doctor probably not up-to-date on the latest evidence-based care
@ProfPaulRalph 2. I often mention the standard estimate for translating medical research to clinical practice (17 years), but there are issues with how we estimate this number (see https://t.co/Q0TrWUwhFi).
@EricKlinenberg No, you have done very well. https://t.co/cC2Goi4jl1
RT @inaphenomeneuro: エビデンスのある基礎研究から医療実践に橋渡しされるまでのタイムラグは平均17年。23の研究レヴューから。理論と実践のギャップは、泳ぎ方を知ることと、実際に泳げることの差として哲学的問いでもあるが、17年は長い。社会の価値観の変容もそれぐ…
RT @inaphenomeneuro: エビデンスのある基礎研究から医療実践に橋渡しされるまでのタイムラグは平均17年。23の研究レヴューから。理論と実践のギャップは、泳ぎ方を知ることと、実際に泳げることの差として哲学的問いでもあるが、17年は長い。社会の価値観の変容もそれぐ…
エビデンスのある基礎研究から医療実践に橋渡しされるまでのタイムラグは平均17年。23の研究レヴューから。理論と実践のギャップは、泳ぎ方を知ることと、実際に泳げることの差として哲学的問いでもあるが、17年は長い。社会の価値観の変容もそれぐらいかかるのかもしれない。 https://t.co/mqRVCaBj2t https://t.co/k8VUPIKKce
@MackayIM @zeynep back in da day was amazed by this article https://t.co/F8KaBUfuWk
RT @TheSGEM: @FutureDocs @jeffreylinder @abbyWUim @SocietyGIM Because of the knowledge translation (KT) gap. it can take 17 years for 14% o…
@FutureDocs @jeffreylinder @abbyWUim @SocietyGIM Because of the knowledge translation (KT) gap. it can take 17 years for 14% of high-quality, clinically relevant information to reach the patient. Patients deserve the best care, based on the best evidence. https://t.co/hzsIi062O0 @NightShiftMD @SAEMEBM https://t.co/JGhB3pD7is
@nate_friedman @KirstyChallen @SAEMonline @AcademicEmerMed @LWestafer @AliRaja_MD @meganranney @First10EM @the_TOTAL_EM KT - Knowledge translation We have evidence that it can take >10 years for high-quality, clinically relevant information to reach the patient. https://t.co/hzsIi062O0
*Reference List* https://t.co/ath0fhPiOT
RT @TheSGEM: @kenjaques @LogicofScience @SAEMEBM I like the quote from Dr. Jackson. Data from 2011 suggests it takes 17 years for 14% of…
@kenjaques @LogicofScience @SAEMEBM I like the quote from Dr. Jackson. Data from 2011 suggests it takes 17 years for 14% of high-quality evidence to reach the patient. https://t.co/hzsIi062O0
We know from other research there is a knowledge translation (KT) gap. It can take 17 years for 14% of high-quality, clinically relevant information to reach the patient. This is too long Patients deserve the best care, based on the best evidence https://t.co/uvaIh2MxMT https://t.co/MEkyvuEPDE
RT @BJSM_BMJ: Good title. From 2011. This paper should have impact within 8 years. https://t.co/CRtkC7vnof https://t.co/JJYL36jN2Z
RT @BJSM_BMJ: Good title. From 2011. This paper should have impact within 8 years. https://t.co/CRtkC7vnof https://t.co/JJYL36jN2Z
Good title. From 2011. This paper should have impact within 8 years. https://t.co/CRtkC7vnof https://t.co/JJYL36jN2Z
Nel campo della salute, tra la pubblicazione di un risultato scientifico e la sua messa in pratica trascorrono 17 anni. Un gap che limita molto lo sviluppo della società, nella sua totalità. https://t.co/mPGwif4yNd
@ProfFeynman @SAEMonline @SAEMEBM Here is the citation https://t.co/hzsIi062O0
@lewis_goodall Some data on this. But note it is an average (of 17 yrs). https://t.co/nUHYAx3lC0
RT @TheSGEM: @jkimb57 @embasic @hp_ems @EMS1 @EMSBlogs @EMSTODAY @EMSWorldFans @the_TOTAL_EM @EMO_Daddy @SAEMEBM @emergmedottawa It has bee…
@jkimb57 @embasic @hp_ems @EMS1 @EMSBlogs @EMSTODAY @EMSWorldFans @the_TOTAL_EM @EMO_Daddy @SAEMEBM @emergmedottawa It has been documented that it takes >10 (17 years for 14%) of the evidence to reach the patient. https://t.co/uvaIh2MxMT https://t.co/YPmr3YAGSw
@and_kell Everyone will have a different tolerance for what’s too long. Teaching knowledge translation the 5yrs doesn’t seem long. It can take 17 years for 14% of high-quality clinically relevant info to reach the patient. I’m trying to cut the KT gap with #SoMe https://t.co/hzsIi062O0
RT @TheSGEM: @med1cinewoman @EpigeneticWhisp @uTobian @NEOrganics @NightShiftMD @lovereignssupr1 @DrKND @va_shiva @lifebiomedguru @AgeofAut…
@med1cinewoman @EpigeneticWhisp @uTobian @NEOrganics @NightShiftMD @lovereignssupr1 @DrKND @va_shiva @lifebiomedguru @AgeofAutism @epochchanger @kenjaques @safe_effective @LotusOak2 Taking a long time to change practice is not unusual in medicine. We refer to this difficulty as the knowledge translation (KT) gap. It has been documented to take 17 years for high-quality, clinically relevant information to reach the patients' bedside. https://t.co/uvaIh2MxMT
@DawnaMughalPhD @drbutsch @DrRobertKushner @GabeSmolarz @STOPObesity Translation of medical innovation into practice is slow. Maddeningly slow. https://t.co/ypDUHVWk6R
Translating scientific discoveries into patient benefit takes 17 years!! **Seems about right** But how on earth does that fit into a REF cycle? #loveResearch #timelyResearch #policyrelevantResearch #impactfulResearch https://t.co/bWPSkazr8L
@rob_sams @Mental_Elf @EverymindAU @AndreaPugh1 @gracecr8tive Someone else asked this too and the answer: https://t.co/SfhA8SHRLD…
RT @Mental_Elf: @RoseAnnieFlo @Dee_Knipe Lots of studies looking at gap btwn health research & practice. Good place to start: https://t.co/…
@RoseAnnieFlo @Dee_Knipe Lots of studies looking at gap btwn health research & practice. Good place to start: https://t.co/myU3Ee8UYk Re: impact of @NICEComms guidelines, there's this mental health 'impact' report: https://t.co/v2NeFV6Ono Personally, I wouldn't call this strong evidence of impact.
@HomegrownJoan @kenjaques @CaulfieldTim @MareadelPortill @OslerHealth @DocMCohen @DrPChouinard @crackedscience @BernieGarrett @jonathanstea @StanKutcher @picardonhealth @GidMK @McGillOSS @FionaMattatall Forgot to include the reference. The actual number is 17 years for 14% of the information. Regardless of the actual number it is far too long. https://t.co/uvaIh2MxMT
@bjweiner @ImpSciUW Can #impsci come up with an updated credible, well-defined, systematically researched figure? https://t.co/dJFsa9pL0E
RT @ilk21: 17 year lag #iclc19 https://t.co/p7KdD4ZW6o
RT @ilk21: 17 year lag #iclc19 https://t.co/p7KdD4ZW6o
RT @ilk21: 17 year lag #iclc19 https://t.co/p7KdD4ZW6o
17 year lag #iclc19 https://t.co/p7KdD4ZW6o
RT @dr_rajgupta: @EMARIANOMD @docmorne @SteveBruce @sanjibadhikary @claralexlobo @Dr_NilarMyint @jeffgadsden @GottumukVijaya @RFAnaesthesia…
RT @pash22: The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research https://t.co/mR1eZcTgJu
RT @pash22: The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research https://t.co/mR1eZcTgJu
The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research https://t.co/mR1eZcTgJu
RT @dr_rajgupta: @EMARIANOMD @docmorne @SteveBruce @sanjibadhikary @claralexlobo @Dr_NilarMyint @jeffgadsden @GottumukVijaya @RFAnaesthesia…
@EMARIANOMD @docmorne @SteveBruce @sanjibadhikary @claralexlobo @Dr_NilarMyint @jeffgadsden @GottumukVijaya @RFAnaesthesia @kaohesham @amit_pawa @nelkassabany @LloydTurbitt @elboghdadly Some evaluations show that it can take up to 17 years for new Best Practices and new research to translate to clinical medicine! So the papers you publish now might not become standard practice until 2036!!! #translationalresearch https://t.co/77pU7iVtUc
For anyone who ever wondered where that "17 years" for innovation and research evidence to reach clinical practice, you're welcome! #translationalresearch #RSMDigiHealth #needtodobetter https://t.co/LlPmlYLGQO
@GatewayMedic @JRossfamilymed @RobinSaunders51 @adriandix @jjhorgan @HealthMatchBC @UBCDFP Here's the source for future reference. Love using that stat. Morris, Z. S., Wooding, S., & Grant, J. (2011). The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 104(12) https://t.co/wObGwaiG3R
@DrPoorman Whaaaat?! I always thought it was 7 years, so thx for sharing this. I'll share a similar policy factoid in return :) It takes on avg 17 years for research knowledge to become policy/practice. https://t.co/YLJf5TJiS3
Shocked by hearing this statistic via @nphillipsca : only 15% of science makes it into practice, and it takes on average 17 years between. Found a reference as well: https://t.co/rU7BAFyXlc
doi: 10.1258/jrsm.2011.110180 · Eric Rowe and 4 others ·
... 10.1258/jrsm. 2011.110180). One way to accelerate this process is to offer your discoveries as a commercial product – and that is what we have now done. At ...
2011;104(12):510–520; doi: 10.1258/jrsm.2011.110180. Carson JL, Grossman BJ, Kleinman S, et al. Red blood cell transfusion: a clinical practice guideline ...
doi: 10.1258/jrsm.2011.110180. 15. Bauer MS, Damschroder L, Hagedorn H, et al. An introduction to implementation science for the non-specialist. BMC ...
... 10.1258/jrsm.2011.110180 · Like · Reply · 2 Reactions 3 Reactions. Jeremy Grimshaw, graphic · Jeremy Grimshaw. Medical Director, Senior ...
doi: 10.1258/jrsm.2011.110180. Reis SE, McDonald MC, Byers SJ. Crossing the Research Valleys of Death: The University of Pittsburgh ...
https://doi.org/10.1258/jrsm.2011.110180. Packer, D. J., Ungson, N. D., & Marsh, J. (2021). Breaking the norm to change the system: Social ...
doi:10.1258/jrsm.2011.110180; Deepak L. Bhatt. Wikipedia. August 12, 2024. Accessed August 30, 2024. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepak_L ...
doi: 10.1258/jrsm.2011.110180. PMID: 22179294; PMCID: PMC3241518. 3. Hemler JR, Hall JD, Cholan RA, Crabtree BF, Damschroder LJ, Solberg LI ...
... 10.1258/jrsm.2011.110180 #bandscheibenvorfall #kreuzbandriss #achillessehne #gesundheitsfakten #gesundheitswesen #physiotherapie #karlsruhe ...
doi:10.1258/jrsm.2011.110180. 30. Doust JA, Bell KJL, Glasziou PP. Potential consequences of changing disease classifications. JAMA. 2020;323 ...
https://doi.org/10.1258/jrsm.2011.110180 . Guo J, Fountain N, Romer K, Yellowhorse Kesler S. Why do doctors still use pagers? : Planet Money ...
... 10.1258/jrsm.2011.110180), I would imagine the time frame is similar (and warranted) to get innovative medical treatments from bench to ...
doi: 10.1258/jrsm.2011.110180. PMID: 22179294; PMCID: PMC3241518. Diner BM, Carpenter CR, O'Connell T, Pang P, Brown MD, Seupaul RA ...
doi:10.1258/jrsm.2011.110180. 5. Our Mission. Choosing Wisely. https://www.choosingwisely.org/our-mission/. Published 2019. Accessed October ...
... 10.1258/jrsm.2011.110180). »Die zeitliche Lücke beträgt fast eine Generation«, verdeutlichte Dr. Ulrich Jaehde, Professor für Klinische ...
... 10.1258/jrsm.2011.110180. 8 AUSTRALIAN TECHNOLOGY NETWORK and GROUP OF EIGHT, Guidelines for completion of case studies in ATN/Go8 EIA impact ...
... 10.1258/jrsm.2011.110180. 8 AUSTRALIAN TECHNOLOGY NETWORK and GROUP OF EIGHT, Guidelines for completion of case studies in ATN/Go8 EIA impact ...
... 10.1258/jrsm.2011.110180. 8 AUSTRALIAN TECHNOLOGY NETWORK and GROUP OF EIGHT, Guidelines for completion of case studies in ATN/Go8 EIA impact ...
com/doi/full/10.1258/jrsm.2011.110180 Pildil on seljaravi meetod ca aastal 1800. Ülle Voog-Oras e Silja Orula ·
doi: 10.1258/jrsm.2011.110180. pmid:22179294. 4. Olsen L, Aisner D, McGinnis JM (2007) The Learning Healthcare System: Workshop Summary (IOM ...
BB
稲I
KM
JP
N
JD
DB
KJ
SM
SV
DR
JK
TM
LR
CG
MS
ب
F
DS
S
IP
MF
AH
MS
DM
OS
LK
A
GT
AK
MS
BB
ふ
松A
L
SF
FL
BM
AF
JG
HE
J
TK
DM
DK
CN
TE
HA
SS
IC
DL
IK
CL
KR
AB
AP
EF
RF
HL
LS
AJ