The Experts below are selected from a list of 94920 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Ian D. Graham - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
building an integrated Knowledge Translation ikt evidence base colloquium proceedings and research direction
Health Research Policy and Systems, 2020Co-Authors: Anita Kothari, Chris Mccutcheon, Ian D. Graham, L BolandAbstract:Background Integrated Knowledge Translation (IKT) is a model of research co-production, whereby researchers partner with Knowledge users throughout the research process and who can use the research recommendations in practice or policy. IKT approaches are used to improve the relevance and impact of research. As an emerging field, however, the evidence underpinning IKT is in active development. The Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network represents a collaborative interdisciplinary team that aims to advance the state of IKT science. Methods In 2017, the Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network issued a call to its members for concept papers to further define IKT, outline an IKT research agenda, and inform the Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network's special meeting entitled, Integrated Knowledge Translation State of the Science Colloquium, in Ottawa, Canada (2018). At the colloquium, authors presented concept papers and discussed Knowledge-gaps for a research agenda and implications for advancing the IKT field. We took detailed field notes, audio-recorded the meeting and analysed the data using qualitative content analysis. Results Twenty-four participants attended the meeting, including researchers (n = 11), trainees (n = 6) and Knowledge users (n = 7). Seven overarching categories emerged from these proceedings - IKT theory, IKT methods, IKT process, promoting partnership, definitions and distinctions of key IKT terms, capacity-building, and role of funders. Within these categories, priorities identified for future IKT research included: (1) improving clarity about research co-production/IKT theories and frameworks; (2) describing the process for engaging Knowledge users; and (3) identifying research co-production/IKT outcomes and methods for evaluation. Conclusion The Integrated Knowledge Translation State of the Science Colloquium initiated a research agenda to advance IKT science and practice. Next steps will focus on building a theoretical and evidence base for IKT.
-
building an integrated Knowledge Translation ikt evidence base colloquium proceedings and research direction
Health Research Policy and Systems, 2020Co-Authors: Anita Kothari, Chris Mccutcheon, Ian D. Graham, L BolandAbstract:Integrated Knowledge Translation (IKT) is a model of research co-production, whereby researchers partner with Knowledge users throughout the research process and who can use the research recommendations in practice or policy. IKT approaches are used to improve the relevance and impact of research. As an emerging field, however, the evidence underpinning IKT is in active development. The Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network represents a collaborative interdisciplinary team that aims to advance the state of IKT science. In 2017, the Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network issued a call to its members for concept papers to further define IKT, outline an IKT research agenda, and inform the Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network’s special meeting entitled, Integrated Knowledge Translation State of the Science Colloquium, in Ottawa, Canada (2018). At the colloquium, authors presented concept papers and discussed Knowledge-gaps for a research agenda and implications for advancing the IKT field. We took detailed field notes, audio-recorded the meeting and analysed the data using qualitative content analysis. Twenty-four participants attended the meeting, including researchers (n = 11), trainees (n = 6) and Knowledge users (n = 7). Seven overarching categories emerged from these proceedings – IKT theory, IKT methods, IKT process, promoting partnership, definitions and distinctions of key IKT terms, capacity-building, and role of funders. Within these categories, priorities identified for future IKT research included: (1) improving clarity about research co-production/IKT theories and frameworks; (2) describing the process for engaging Knowledge users; and (3) identifying research co-production/IKT outcomes and methods for evaluation. The Integrated Knowledge Translation State of the Science Colloquium initiated a research agenda to advance IKT science and practice. Next steps will focus on building a theoretical and evidence base for IKT.
-
patient and public engagement in integrated Knowledge Translation research are we there yet
Research Involvement and Engagement, 2019Co-Authors: Davina Banner, Marc Bains, Sandra L Carroll, Damanpreet K Kandola, Danielle E Rolfe, Caroline Wong, Ian D. GrahamAbstract:There have been many attempts to improve how healthcare services are developed and delivered. Despite this, we know that there are many gaps and differences in practice and that these can lead to poor patient outcomes. In addition, there are also concerns that research is being undertaken that does not reflects the realities or needs of those using healthcare services, and that the use of research findings in practice is slow. As such, shared approaches to research, such as integrated Knowledge Translation, are being used. Integrated Knowledge Translation (IKT) is a research approach that brings together researchers, along with other stakeholders that have Knowledge about a particular healthcare issue. Stakeholders may include healthcare providers and policy-makers. More recently, there has been a growing awareness of the need to include patients and members of the public within research processes. These collaborative and patient-oriented research approaches are seen as a way to develop research that tackles ongoing gaps in practice and reflect the insights, needs and priorities of those most affected by health research outcomes. Despite great support, little is known about how these major research approaches are connected, or how they may bring about improvements in the development and use of research evidence. In this paper, we examine how IKT and patient engagement processes are linked, as well as exploring where differences exist. Through this, we highlight opportunities for greater patient engagement in IKT research and to identify areas that need to be understood further. Healthcare organizations across the world are being increasingly challenged to develop and implement services that are evidence-based and bring about improvement in patient and health service outcomes. Despite an increasing emphasis upon evidence-based practice, large variations in practice remain and gaps pervade in the creation and application of Knowledge that improves outcomes. More collaborative models of health research have emerged over recent years, including integrated Knowledge Translation (IKT), whereby partnerships with key Knowledge users are developed to enhance the responsiveness and application of the findings. Likewise, the meaningful engagement of patients, in addition to the inclusion of patient-reported outcomes and priorities, has been hailed as another mechanism to improve the relevance, impact and efficiency of research. Collectively, both IKT and patient engagement processes provide a vehicle to support research that can address health disparities and improve the delivery of effective and responsive healthcare services. However, the evidence to support their impact is limited and while these approaches are inextricably connected through their engagement focus, it is unclear how IKT and patient engagement processes are linked conceptually, theoretically, and practically. In this paper, we will begin to critically examine some of the linkages and tensions that exist between IKT and patient-engagement for research and will examine potential opportunities for IKT researchers as they navigate and enact meaningful partnerships with patients and the public.
-
Knowledge Translation in health care moving from evidence to practice
2009Co-Authors: Sharon E. Straus, Jacqueline Tetroe, Ian D. GrahamAbstract:Section 1: Introduction 1.1 Introduction: Knowledge Translation-What it is and what it isn t Sharon E. Straus, Jacqueline Tetroe, and Ian D. Graham 1.2 Integrated Knowledge Translation Sarah Bowen and Ian D. Graham Section 2: Knowledge Creation 2.0 Introduction-The K in KT: Knowledge Creation Sharon E. Straus 2.1 Knowledge Synthesis Andrea C. Tricco, Jennifer Tetzlaff, and David Moher 2.2 Knowledge Translation Tools Melissa C. Brouwers, Annette M. O Connor, and Dawn Stacey 2.3 Searching for Research Findings and KT Literature K. Ann McKibbon and Cynthia Lokker 2.4 Knowledge Dissemination: End of Grant Knowledge Transfer Ian D. Graham, Jacqueline M. Tetroe, and Michelle Gagnon Section 3: The Action Cycle 3.0 Introduction Sharon E. Straus 3.1 Identifying the Knowledge to action gaps Alison L Kitson and Sharon E. Straus 3.2 Adapting Knowledge to a local context Margaret B. Harrison, Ian D. Graham, Beatrice Fervers, and Joan van den Hoek Subsection 3.3: Barriers 3.3.a Barriers and facilitators strategies for identification and measurement France Legare and Peng Zhang 3.3.b Selecting and tailoring Knowledge Translation interventions Mapping KT interventions to barriers and facilitators Heather Colquhoun, Jeremy Grimshaw, and Michel Wensing Subsection 3.4: Selecting KT Interventions 3.4.a Developing and selecting Knowledge Translation interventions Michel Wensing, Marije Bosch, and Richard Grol 3.4.b Formal educational interventions Dave Davis, Nancy Davis, and Nathan Johnson 3.4.c Linkage and Exchange Interventions Ann C. Macaulay and Jonathan Salsberg 3.4.d Audit and feedback interventions Robbie Foy and Martin Eccles 3.4.e Informatics interventions Samir Gupta and K. Ann McKibbon 3.4.f Patient-direct and Patient-mediated KT Interventions Dawn Stacey and Sophie Hill 3.4.g Organisational interventions Ewan B. Ferlie 3.4.h Shared decision making France Legare and Peng Zhang 3.4.i Financial incentive interventions Gerd Flodgren, Martin P. Eccles, Anthony Scott, and Sasha Shepperd 3.5 Monitoring Knowledge use and evaluating outcomes Sharon E. Straus, Jacqueline Tetroe, Onil Bhattacharyya, Merrick Zwarenstein, and Ian D. Graham 3.6 Sustaining Knowledge use Barbara Davies and Nancy Edwards Subsection 3.7 Case examples 3.7.a An Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Approach in Wound Care Ian D. Graham and Margaret B. Harrison 3.7.b Tips on implementation Judith A. Ritchie Section 4: Theories and Models of Knowledge to Action 4.1 Planned action theories Ian D. Graham, Jacqueline Tetroe, and the KT Theories Group 4.2 Cognitive psychology theories of change in provider behavior Alison M. Hutchinson and Carole A. Estabrooks 4.3 Educational theories Alison M. Hutchinson and Carole A. Estabrooks 4.4 Organizational theories Jean-Louis Denis and Pascale Lehoux 4.5 Quality improvement Anne Sales Section 5: Evaluation of Knowledge to Action 5.1 Methodologies to Evaluate Effectiveness of Knowledge Translation Interventions Onil Bhattacharyya, Leigh Hayden, and Merrick Zwarenstein 5.2 Economic evaluation of KTI Emma Quinn, Craig Mitton and Jeanette Ward Section 6: Ethics 6.1 Ethics in the Science Lifecycle: Broadening the Scope of Ethical Analysis Kristiann Allen and Jaime Flamenbaum 6.2 Ethical Issues in Cluster-Randomized Trials in Knowledge Translation Monica Taljaard, Charles Weijer, and Jeremy M. Grimshaw Index
-
development of a mentorship strategy a Knowledge Translation case study
Journal of Continuing Education in The Health Professions, 2008Co-Authors: Sharon E. Straus, Ian D. Graham, Mark Taylor, Jocelyn LockyerAbstract:Introduction: There are many theories and frameworks for achieving Knowledge Translation, and the assortment can be confusing to those responsible for planning, evaluation, or policymaking in Knowledge Translation. A conceptual framework developed by Graham and colleagues provides an approach that builds on the commonalities found in an assessment of planned-action theories. This article describes the application of this Knowledge to action framework to a mentorship initiative in academic medicine. Mentorship influences career success but is threatened in academia by increased clinical, research, and administrative demands. Methods: A case study review was undertaken of the role of mentors, the experiences of mentors and mentees, and mentorship initiatives in developing and retaining clinician scientists at two universities in Alberta, Canada. This project involved relevant stakeholders including researchers, university administrators, and research funders. Results: The Knowledge to action framework was used to develop a strategy for mentorship for clinician researchers. The framework highlights the need to identify and engage stakeholders in the process of Knowledge implementation. A series of initiatives were selected and tailored to barriers and facilitators to implementation of the mentorship initiative; strategies for evaluating the Knowledge use and its impact on outcomes were developed. Discussion: The Knowledge to action framework can be used to develop a mentorship initiative for clinician researchers. Future work to evaluate the impact of this intervention on recruitment and retention is planned.
Anita Kothari - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Exploring the Knowledge Translation of domestic violence research: A literature review.
Health & social care in the community, 2020Co-Authors: Jacqui Cameron, Anita Kothari, Cathy Humphreys, Kelsey HegartyAbstract:There is growing recognition of the links between Knowledge Translation, policy and practice, particularly in the domestic violence research area. A literature review applying a systematic approach with a realist lens was the preferred methodology. The review answered the following question: What are the mechanisms of change in research networks which 'work' to support Knowledge Translation? A search of eight electronic databases for articles published between 1960 and 2018 was completed, with 2,999 records retrieved, 2,869 records excluded and 130 full-text articles screened for final inclusion in the review. The inclusion criteria were purposefully broad, including any study design or data source (including grey literature) with a focus on domestic violence Knowledge Translation. The analysis of included studies using a realist lens identified the mechanisms of change to support Knowledge Translation. A disaggregation of the included studies identified five theories focused on the following outcomes: (1) develop key messages, (2) flexible evidence use, (3) strengthen partnerships, (4) capacity building and (5) research utilisation. This review adds to our understanding of Knowledge Translation of domestic violence research. The mechanisms of change identified may support Knowledge Translation of research networks. Further research will focus on exploring the potential application of these program theories with a research network.
-
building an integrated Knowledge Translation ikt evidence base colloquium proceedings and research direction
Health Research Policy and Systems, 2020Co-Authors: Anita Kothari, Chris Mccutcheon, Ian D. Graham, L BolandAbstract:Background Integrated Knowledge Translation (IKT) is a model of research co-production, whereby researchers partner with Knowledge users throughout the research process and who can use the research recommendations in practice or policy. IKT approaches are used to improve the relevance and impact of research. As an emerging field, however, the evidence underpinning IKT is in active development. The Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network represents a collaborative interdisciplinary team that aims to advance the state of IKT science. Methods In 2017, the Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network issued a call to its members for concept papers to further define IKT, outline an IKT research agenda, and inform the Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network's special meeting entitled, Integrated Knowledge Translation State of the Science Colloquium, in Ottawa, Canada (2018). At the colloquium, authors presented concept papers and discussed Knowledge-gaps for a research agenda and implications for advancing the IKT field. We took detailed field notes, audio-recorded the meeting and analysed the data using qualitative content analysis. Results Twenty-four participants attended the meeting, including researchers (n = 11), trainees (n = 6) and Knowledge users (n = 7). Seven overarching categories emerged from these proceedings - IKT theory, IKT methods, IKT process, promoting partnership, definitions and distinctions of key IKT terms, capacity-building, and role of funders. Within these categories, priorities identified for future IKT research included: (1) improving clarity about research co-production/IKT theories and frameworks; (2) describing the process for engaging Knowledge users; and (3) identifying research co-production/IKT outcomes and methods for evaluation. Conclusion The Integrated Knowledge Translation State of the Science Colloquium initiated a research agenda to advance IKT science and practice. Next steps will focus on building a theoretical and evidence base for IKT.
-
building an integrated Knowledge Translation ikt evidence base colloquium proceedings and research direction
Health Research Policy and Systems, 2020Co-Authors: Anita Kothari, Chris Mccutcheon, Ian D. Graham, L BolandAbstract:Integrated Knowledge Translation (IKT) is a model of research co-production, whereby researchers partner with Knowledge users throughout the research process and who can use the research recommendations in practice or policy. IKT approaches are used to improve the relevance and impact of research. As an emerging field, however, the evidence underpinning IKT is in active development. The Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network represents a collaborative interdisciplinary team that aims to advance the state of IKT science. In 2017, the Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network issued a call to its members for concept papers to further define IKT, outline an IKT research agenda, and inform the Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network’s special meeting entitled, Integrated Knowledge Translation State of the Science Colloquium, in Ottawa, Canada (2018). At the colloquium, authors presented concept papers and discussed Knowledge-gaps for a research agenda and implications for advancing the IKT field. We took detailed field notes, audio-recorded the meeting and analysed the data using qualitative content analysis. Twenty-four participants attended the meeting, including researchers (n = 11), trainees (n = 6) and Knowledge users (n = 7). Seven overarching categories emerged from these proceedings – IKT theory, IKT methods, IKT process, promoting partnership, definitions and distinctions of key IKT terms, capacity-building, and role of funders. Within these categories, priorities identified for future IKT research included: (1) improving clarity about research co-production/IKT theories and frameworks; (2) describing the process for engaging Knowledge users; and (3) identifying research co-production/IKT outcomes and methods for evaluation. The Integrated Knowledge Translation State of the Science Colloquium initiated a research agenda to advance IKT science and practice. Next steps will focus on building a theoretical and evidence base for IKT.
-
Integrated Knowledge Translation: digging deeper, moving forward
Journal of epidemiology and community health, 2017Co-Authors: Anita Kothari, C. Nadine WathenAbstract:Background Integrated Knowledge Translation has risen in popularity as a solution to the underuse of research in policy and practice settings. It engages Knowledge users—policymakers, practitioners, patients/consumers or their advocates, and members of the wider public—in mutually beneficial research that can involve the joint development of research questions, data collection, analysis and dissemination of findings. Knowledge that is co-produced has a better chance of being implemented. Discussion The purpose of this paper is to update developments in the field of integrated Knowledge Translation through a deeper analysis of the approach in practice-oriented and policy-oriented health research. We present collaborative models that fall outside the scope of integrated Knowledge Translation, but then explore consensus-based approaches and networks as alternate sites of Knowledge co-production. We discuss the need to advance the field through the development, or use, of data collection and interpretation tools that creatively engage Knowledge users in the research process. Most importantly, conceptually relevant outcomes need to be identified, including ones that focus on team transformation through the co-production of Knowledge. Conclusions We explore some of these challenges and benefits in detail to help researchers understand what integrated Knowledge Translation means, and whether the approach9s potential added value is worth the investment of time, energy and other resources.
-
using realist evaluation to open the black box of Knowledge Translation a state of the art review
Implementation Science, 2014Co-Authors: Katherine Salter, Anita KothariAbstract:In Knowledge Translation, complex interventions may be implemented in the attempt to improve uptake of research-based Knowledge in practice. Traditional evaluation efforts that focus on aggregate effectiveness represent an oversimplification of both the environment and the interventions themselves. However, theory-based approaches to evaluation, such as realist evaluation (RE), may be better-suited to examination of complex Knowledge Translation interventions with a view to understanding what works, for whom, and under what conditions. It is the aim of the present state-of-the-art review to examine current literature with regard to the use of RE in the assessment of Knowledge Translation interventions implemented within healthcare environments. Multiple online databases were searched from 1997 through June 2013. Primary studies examining the application or implementation of Knowledge Translation interventions within healthcare settings and using RE were selected for inclusion. Varying applications of RE across studies were examined in terms of a) reporting of core elements of RE, and b) potential feasibility of this evaluation method. A total of 14 studies (6 study protocols), published between 2007 and 2013, were identified for inclusion. Projects were initiated in a variety of healthcare settings and represented a range of interventions. While a majority of authors mentioned context (C), mechanism (M) and outcome (O), a minority reported the development of C-M-O configurations or testable hypotheses based on these configurations. Four completed studies reported results that included refinement of proposed C-M-O configurations and offered explanations within the RE framework. In the few studies offering insight regarding challenges associated with the use of RE, difficulties were expressed regarding the definition of both mechanisms and contextual factors. Overall, RE was perceived as time-consuming and resource intensive. The use of RE in Knowledge Translation is relatively new; however, theory-building approaches to the examination of complex interventions in this area may be increasing as researchers attempt to identify what works, for whom and under what circumstances. Completion of the RE cycle may be challenging, particularly in the development of C-M-O configurations; however, as researchers approach challenges and explore innovations in its application, rich and detailed accounts may improve feasibility.
L Boland - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
building an integrated Knowledge Translation ikt evidence base colloquium proceedings and research direction
Health Research Policy and Systems, 2020Co-Authors: Anita Kothari, Chris Mccutcheon, Ian D. Graham, L BolandAbstract:Background Integrated Knowledge Translation (IKT) is a model of research co-production, whereby researchers partner with Knowledge users throughout the research process and who can use the research recommendations in practice or policy. IKT approaches are used to improve the relevance and impact of research. As an emerging field, however, the evidence underpinning IKT is in active development. The Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network represents a collaborative interdisciplinary team that aims to advance the state of IKT science. Methods In 2017, the Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network issued a call to its members for concept papers to further define IKT, outline an IKT research agenda, and inform the Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network's special meeting entitled, Integrated Knowledge Translation State of the Science Colloquium, in Ottawa, Canada (2018). At the colloquium, authors presented concept papers and discussed Knowledge-gaps for a research agenda and implications for advancing the IKT field. We took detailed field notes, audio-recorded the meeting and analysed the data using qualitative content analysis. Results Twenty-four participants attended the meeting, including researchers (n = 11), trainees (n = 6) and Knowledge users (n = 7). Seven overarching categories emerged from these proceedings - IKT theory, IKT methods, IKT process, promoting partnership, definitions and distinctions of key IKT terms, capacity-building, and role of funders. Within these categories, priorities identified for future IKT research included: (1) improving clarity about research co-production/IKT theories and frameworks; (2) describing the process for engaging Knowledge users; and (3) identifying research co-production/IKT outcomes and methods for evaluation. Conclusion The Integrated Knowledge Translation State of the Science Colloquium initiated a research agenda to advance IKT science and practice. Next steps will focus on building a theoretical and evidence base for IKT.
-
building an integrated Knowledge Translation ikt evidence base colloquium proceedings and research direction
Health Research Policy and Systems, 2020Co-Authors: Anita Kothari, Chris Mccutcheon, Ian D. Graham, L BolandAbstract:Integrated Knowledge Translation (IKT) is a model of research co-production, whereby researchers partner with Knowledge users throughout the research process and who can use the research recommendations in practice or policy. IKT approaches are used to improve the relevance and impact of research. As an emerging field, however, the evidence underpinning IKT is in active development. The Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network represents a collaborative interdisciplinary team that aims to advance the state of IKT science. In 2017, the Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network issued a call to its members for concept papers to further define IKT, outline an IKT research agenda, and inform the Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network’s special meeting entitled, Integrated Knowledge Translation State of the Science Colloquium, in Ottawa, Canada (2018). At the colloquium, authors presented concept papers and discussed Knowledge-gaps for a research agenda and implications for advancing the IKT field. We took detailed field notes, audio-recorded the meeting and analysed the data using qualitative content analysis. Twenty-four participants attended the meeting, including researchers (n = 11), trainees (n = 6) and Knowledge users (n = 7). Seven overarching categories emerged from these proceedings – IKT theory, IKT methods, IKT process, promoting partnership, definitions and distinctions of key IKT terms, capacity-building, and role of funders. Within these categories, priorities identified for future IKT research included: (1) improving clarity about research co-production/IKT theories and frameworks; (2) describing the process for engaging Knowledge users; and (3) identifying research co-production/IKT outcomes and methods for evaluation. The Integrated Knowledge Translation State of the Science Colloquium initiated a research agenda to advance IKT science and practice. Next steps will focus on building a theoretical and evidence base for IKT.
Jacqueline Tetroe - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Knowledge Translation in health care moving from evidence to practice
2009Co-Authors: Sharon E. Straus, Jacqueline Tetroe, Ian D. GrahamAbstract:Section 1: Introduction 1.1 Introduction: Knowledge Translation-What it is and what it isn t Sharon E. Straus, Jacqueline Tetroe, and Ian D. Graham 1.2 Integrated Knowledge Translation Sarah Bowen and Ian D. Graham Section 2: Knowledge Creation 2.0 Introduction-The K in KT: Knowledge Creation Sharon E. Straus 2.1 Knowledge Synthesis Andrea C. Tricco, Jennifer Tetzlaff, and David Moher 2.2 Knowledge Translation Tools Melissa C. Brouwers, Annette M. O Connor, and Dawn Stacey 2.3 Searching for Research Findings and KT Literature K. Ann McKibbon and Cynthia Lokker 2.4 Knowledge Dissemination: End of Grant Knowledge Transfer Ian D. Graham, Jacqueline M. Tetroe, and Michelle Gagnon Section 3: The Action Cycle 3.0 Introduction Sharon E. Straus 3.1 Identifying the Knowledge to action gaps Alison L Kitson and Sharon E. Straus 3.2 Adapting Knowledge to a local context Margaret B. Harrison, Ian D. Graham, Beatrice Fervers, and Joan van den Hoek Subsection 3.3: Barriers 3.3.a Barriers and facilitators strategies for identification and measurement France Legare and Peng Zhang 3.3.b Selecting and tailoring Knowledge Translation interventions Mapping KT interventions to barriers and facilitators Heather Colquhoun, Jeremy Grimshaw, and Michel Wensing Subsection 3.4: Selecting KT Interventions 3.4.a Developing and selecting Knowledge Translation interventions Michel Wensing, Marije Bosch, and Richard Grol 3.4.b Formal educational interventions Dave Davis, Nancy Davis, and Nathan Johnson 3.4.c Linkage and Exchange Interventions Ann C. Macaulay and Jonathan Salsberg 3.4.d Audit and feedback interventions Robbie Foy and Martin Eccles 3.4.e Informatics interventions Samir Gupta and K. Ann McKibbon 3.4.f Patient-direct and Patient-mediated KT Interventions Dawn Stacey and Sophie Hill 3.4.g Organisational interventions Ewan B. Ferlie 3.4.h Shared decision making France Legare and Peng Zhang 3.4.i Financial incentive interventions Gerd Flodgren, Martin P. Eccles, Anthony Scott, and Sasha Shepperd 3.5 Monitoring Knowledge use and evaluating outcomes Sharon E. Straus, Jacqueline Tetroe, Onil Bhattacharyya, Merrick Zwarenstein, and Ian D. Graham 3.6 Sustaining Knowledge use Barbara Davies and Nancy Edwards Subsection 3.7 Case examples 3.7.a An Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Approach in Wound Care Ian D. Graham and Margaret B. Harrison 3.7.b Tips on implementation Judith A. Ritchie Section 4: Theories and Models of Knowledge to Action 4.1 Planned action theories Ian D. Graham, Jacqueline Tetroe, and the KT Theories Group 4.2 Cognitive psychology theories of change in provider behavior Alison M. Hutchinson and Carole A. Estabrooks 4.3 Educational theories Alison M. Hutchinson and Carole A. Estabrooks 4.4 Organizational theories Jean-Louis Denis and Pascale Lehoux 4.5 Quality improvement Anne Sales Section 5: Evaluation of Knowledge to Action 5.1 Methodologies to Evaluate Effectiveness of Knowledge Translation Interventions Onil Bhattacharyya, Leigh Hayden, and Merrick Zwarenstein 5.2 Economic evaluation of KTI Emma Quinn, Craig Mitton and Jeanette Ward Section 6: Ethics 6.1 Ethics in the Science Lifecycle: Broadening the Scope of Ethical Analysis Kristiann Allen and Jaime Flamenbaum 6.2 Ethical Issues in Cluster-Randomized Trials in Knowledge Translation Monica Taljaard, Charles Weijer, and Jeremy M. Grimshaw Index
-
health research funding agencies support and promotion of Knowledge Translation an international study
Milbank Quarterly, 2008Co-Authors: Jacqueline Tetroe, Camilla Palmhoj Nielson, Armita Adily, Jeanette E Ward, Pierre Durieux, Nicole Robinson, Martin P Eccles, Ian D. Graham, Michel Wensing, Cassandra PorterAbstract:CONTEXT: The process of Knowledge Translation (KT) in health research depends on the activities of a wide range of actors, including health professionals, researchers, the public, policymakers, and research funders. Little is known, however, about health research funding agencies' support and promotion of KT. Our team asked thirty-three agencies from Australia, Canada, France, the Netherlands, Scandinavia, the United Kingdom, and the United States about their role in promoting the results of the research they fund. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with a sample of key informants from applied health funding agencies identified by the investigators. The interviews were supplemented with information from the agencies' websites. The final coding was derived from an iterative thematic analysis. FINDINGS: There was a lack of clarity between agencies as to what is meant by KT and how it is operationalized. Agencies also varied in their degree of engagement in this process. The agencies' abilities to create a pull for research findings; to engage in linkage and exchange between agencies, researchers, and decision makers; and to push results to various audiences differed as well. Finally, the evaluation of the effectiveness of KT strategies remains a methodological challenge. CONCLUSIONS: Funding agencies need to think about both their conceptual framework and their operational definition of KT, so that it is clear what is and what is not considered to be KT, and adjust their funding opportunities and activities accordingly. While we have cataloged the range of Knowledge Translation activities conducted across these agencies, little is known about their effectiveness and so a greater emphasis on evaluation is needed. It would appear that "best practice" for funding agencies is an elusive concept depending on the particular agency's size, context, mandate, financial considerations, and governance structure.
-
health research funding agencies support and promotion of Knowledge Translation an international study
Milbank Quarterly, 2008Co-Authors: Jacqueline Tetroe, Camilla Palmhoj Nielson, Armita Adily, Pierre Durieux, Nicole Robinson, Martin P Eccles, Ian D. Graham, Michel Wensing, Robbie Foy, Jeanette E WardAbstract:Health and health care research has the potential to improve people's health, the delivery of health care, and patients' outcomes. Despite the well-documented cases in which publication alone was sufficient to move research into practice very quickly (Beral, Bull, and Reeves 2005; Hersh, Stefanick, and Stafford 2004), the incorporation of research findings into health policy and routine clinical practice is often unpredictable and can be slow and haphazard (AHRQ 2001), thereby diminishing the return to society from investments in research. Effective and efficient means, therefore, are required to realize the benefits of such investments, and as a result, health-funding agencies are increasingly interested in the process of Knowledge Translation. Knowledge Translation is a term that is used frequently and rather loosely and has been defined in different ways. A recent Google search (“definition Knowledge Translation”), restricted to Canadian web pages, yielded 1,350,000 hits. Many websites cite the definition developed by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR, the organization that funded this study): “the exchange, synthesis and ethically-sound application of Knowledge—within a complex system of interactions between researchers and users—to accelerate the capture of the benefits of research for Canadians through improved health, more effective services and products, and a strengthened health care system” (see http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/29418.html, accessed September 20, 2007). In their view, Knowledge Translation is a broad concept encompassing all the steps between the creation of new Knowledge and its application in the real world. Although other terms are used, including Knowledge transfer, dissemination, research use, and implementation research (Graham et al. 2006), we shall use the term Knowledge Translation (KT) in this article because it was introduced by the CIHR and because we used it throughout our research protocol. Lomas (1993) offered a useful categorization of Knowledge Translation activities that groups them into three conceptually distinct types: diffusion, dissemination, and implementation. He defined diffusion as those efforts that are passive and unplanned. In this category of Knowledge Translation activities, the onus is on the potential adopter to seek out the information. Dissemination is an active process to spread the message that involves targeting and tailoring the evidence and the message to a particular target audience. Although these strategies raise awareness and may influence attitudes, they may or may not change the behavior of the target audience. Implementation is an even more active process that involves systematic efforts to encourage adoption of the evidence by identifying and overcoming barriers. An alternative way of thinking about Knowledge Translation is based on the degree of engagement with the potential audience. In this conceptualization, activities are considered to be “push,” concentrating on diffusion and efforts to disseminate to a broad audience; “pull,” focused on the needs of users, thereby creating an appetite for research results (Lavis, McLeod, and Gildiner 2003); or “linkage and exchange,” building and maintaining relationships in order to exchange Knowledge and ideas (Canadian Health Services Research Foundation 1999; Lomas 2000). The process of KT in health research depends on the activities of a wide range of actors, including health professionals, researchers, the public, policymakers, and research funders (Grimshaw, Ward, and Eccles 2001). KT often requires a range of interventions of varying complexity and resource intensiveness, targeting different levels of health care systems as well as different audiences (Lomas 1997). There has been, however, relatively little empirical research on the actual or potential Knowledge Translation roles, responsibilities, and activities of the different actors. A review of the effectiveness of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies directed at health professionals (Grimshaw et al. 2004) found median effect sizes ranging from 8.1 to 14.1 percent for individual strategies targeting behavior change in practitioners (e.g., audit and feedback, or academic detailing). The strategies identified were of variable effectiveness and were used in many different settings, making it impossible to predict which would work best in a given context. Furthermore, despite the growing body of evidence (Heap and Parikh 2005) regarding how new ideas disseminate through an industry, the dissemination of Knowledge produced by health researchers (Ramlogan et al. 2005) has received relatively less attention. But a recent survey of applied health researchers conducted by Graham and his colleagues (Graham, Grimshaw, et al. 2005) indicated that researchers were most successful and confident when disseminating the results of their research to their academic colleagues. Most were less successful, however, in disseminating these results to other target audiences, even when they felt that their results were of considerable importance to both the public and decision makers. When considering the public's role in the KT process, it seems intuitively obvious that the media can and do play an important role in influencing the public in matters of health and health care (see, e.g., Grilli, Ramsay, and Minozzi 1998; Petrella et al. 2005), but little is known about how to harness and control this potential KT vehicle. Policymakers also are important actors in the KT realm. A systematic review of health policymakers' perceptions of their use of evidence in making policy decisions (Innvaer et al. 2002) suggested that decision makers might make more use of research results if there were more linkage and exchange between the research and the policy world and if researchers answered the kinds of questions that policymakers asked, in a time frame useful to them.
-
some theoretical underpinnings of Knowledge Translation
Academic Emergency Medicine, 2007Co-Authors: Ian D. Graham, Jacqueline TetroeAbstract:A careful analysis of the definition of Knowledge Translation highlights the importance of the judicious Translation of research into practice and policy. There is, however, a considerable gap between research and practice. Closing the research-to-practice gap involves changing clinical practice, a complex and challenging endeavor. There is increasing recognition that efforts to change practice should be guided by conceptual models or frameworks to better understand the process of change. The authors conducted a focused literature search, developed inclusion criteria to identify planned action theories, and then extracted data from each theory to determine the origins, examine the meaning, judge the logical consistency, and define the degree of generalizability, parsimony, and testability. An analysis was conducted of the concepts found in each theory, and a set of action categories was developed that form the phases of planned action. Thirty-one planned action theories were identified that formed the basis of the analyses. An Access database was created, as well as a KT Theories User's Guide that synthesizes all the planned change models and theories, identifies common elements of each, and provides information on their use. There are many planned change models and frameworks with many common elements and action categories. Whenever any planned change model is used, change agents should consider documenting their experiences with the model so as to advance understanding of how useful the model is and to provide information to others who are attempting a similar project.
-
Lost in Knowledge Translation: time for a map?
The Journal of continuing education in the health professions, 2006Co-Authors: Ian D. Graham, Wenda Caswell, Jacqueline Tetroe, Margaret B. Harrison, J Logan, Stephen E Straus, Nicole RobinsonAbstract:There is confusion and misunderstanding about the concepts of Knowledge Translation, Knowledge transfer, Knowledge exchange, research utilization, implementation, diffusion, and dissemination. We review the terms and definitions used to describe the concept of moving Knowledge into action. We also offer a conceptual framework for thinking about the process and integrate the roles of Knowledge creation and Knowledge application. The implications of Knowledge Translation for continuing education in the health professions include the need to base continuing education on the best available Knowledge, the use of educational and other transfer strategies that are known to be effective, and the value of learning about planned-action theories to be better able to understand and influence change in practice settings.
Maureen Dobbins - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
impact of an organization wide Knowledge Translation strategy to support evidence informed public health decision making
BMC Public Health, 2018Co-Authors: Maureen Dobbins, Robyn L Traynor, Stephanie Workentine, Reza Yousefinooraie, Jennifer YostAbstract:The public health sector is moving toward adopting evidence-informed decision making into practice, but effort is still required to effectively develop capacity and promote contextual factors that advance and sustain it. This paper describes the impact of an organization-wide Knowledge Translation intervention delivered by Knowledge brokers on evidence-informed decision making Knowledge, skills and behaviour. A case study design was implemented with the intervention and data collection tailored to the unique needs of each case (health department). A Knowledge broker provided training workshops and mentored small groups through a seven step process of evidence-informed decision making. The intervention was delivered over 22 months; data related to evidence-informed decision making Knowledge, skills and behaviour were collected at baseline and follow-up. Mixed effects regression models were developed to assess the impact of involvement in the intervention on the evidence-informed decision making outcomes. Data from a total of 606 health department staff were collected during baseline: 207 (33%) staff from Case A, 304 (28%) from Case B, and 95 (47%) from Case C. There were a total of 804 participants at follow-up: 258 (42%) from Case A, 391 from Case B (37%), and 155 (50%) from Case C. Statistically significant increases in Knowledge and skills were observed overall, and in all three health departments. An increase in evidence-informed decision making behaviour was observed among those intensively involved in the intervention from all cases (statistically significant in Case A). The organizational characteristics of strategic priority, leadership, readiness, and choice of staff emerged as important factors in the change process. Knowledge brokering is a promising organizational Knowledge Translation intervention to support evidence-informed decision making. The intervention appeared to have the greatest impact on those who became actively engaged with the Knowledge broker in the intervention. Active participation in face-to-face training activities with a Knowledge broker, focused specifically on evidence-informed decision making skill development, led to the greatest impact on associated behaviours, Knowledge, and skills. Several organizational factors emerged as integral to success of the Knowledge Translation intervention.
-
Knowledge Translation strategies to improve the use of evidence in public health decision making in local government intervention design and implementation plan
Implementation Science, 2013Co-Authors: Rebecca Armstrong, Maureen Dobbins, Mark Petticrew, Elizabeth Waters, Laurie M Anderson, Laurence Moore, Rachel Clark, Tahna Pettman, Catherine Burns, Marjorie MoodieAbstract:Background: Knowledge Translation strategies are an approach to increase the use of evidence within policy and practice decision-making contexts. In clinical and health service contexts, Knowledge Translation strategies have focused on individual behavior change, however the multi-system context of public health requires a multi-level, multi-strategy approach. This paper describes the design of and implementation plan for a Knowledge Translation intervention for public health decision making in local government. Methods: Four preliminary research studies contributed findings to the design of the intervention: a systematic review of Knowledge Translation intervention effectiveness research, a scoping study of Knowledge Translation perspectives and relevant theory literature, a survey of the local government public health workforce, and a study of the use of evidence-informed decision-making for public health in local government. A logic model was then developed to represent the putative pathways between intervention inputs, processes, and outcomes operating between individual-, organizational-, and system-level strategies. This formed the basis of the intervention plan. Results: The systematic and scoping reviews identified that effective and promising strategies to increase access to research evidence require an integrated intervention of skill development, access to a Knowledge broker, resources and tools for evidence-informed decision making, and networking for information sharing. Interviews and survey analysis suggested that the intervention needs to operate at individual and organizational levels, comprising workforce development, access to evidence, and regular contact with a Knowledge broker to increase access to intervention evidence; develop skills in appraisal and integration of evidence; strengthen networks; and explore organizational factors to build organizational cultures receptive to embedding evidence in practice. The logic model incorporated these inputs and strategies with a set of outcomes to measure the intervention’s effectiveness based on the theoretical frameworks, evaluation studies, and decision-maker experiences. Conclusion: Documenting the design of and implementation plan for this Knowledge Translation intervention provides a transparent, theoretical, and practical approach to a complex intervention. It provides significant insights into how practitioners might engage with evidence in public health decision making. While this intervention model was designed for the local government context, it is likely to be applicable and generalizable across sectors and settings.
-
the effectiveness of Knowledge Translation strategies used in public health a systematic review
BMC Public Health, 2012Co-Authors: Rebecca Larocca, Donna Ciliska, Maureen Dobbins, Jennifer Yost, Michelle L ButtAbstract:Literature related to the effectiveness of Knowledge Translation (KT) strategies used in public health is lacking. The capacity to seek, analyze, and synthesize evidence-based information in public health is linked to greater success in making policy choices that have the best potential to yield positive outcomes for populations. The purpose of this systematic review is to identify the effectiveness of KT strategies used to promote evidence-informed decision making (EIDM) among public health decision makers.
-
uncovering tacit Knowledge a pilot study to broaden the concept of Knowledge in Knowledge Translation
BMC Health Services Research, 2011Co-Authors: Anita Kothari, Maureen Dobbins, Julia J Bickford, Nancy Edwards, Mechthild MeyerAbstract:All sectors in health care are being asked to focus on the Knowledge-to-practice gap, or Knowledge Translation, to increase service effectiveness. A social interaction approach to Knowledge Translation assumes that research evidence becomes integrated with previously held Knowledge, and practitioners build on and co-create Knowledge through mutual interactions. Knowledge Translation strategies for public health have not provided anticipated positive changes in evidence-based practice, possibly due in part to a narrow conceptualization of Knowledge. More work is needed to understand the role of tacit Knowledge in decision-making and practice. This pilot study examined how health practitioners applied tacit Knowledge in public health program planning and implementation.
-
finding Knowledge Translation articles in cinahl
Studies in health technology and informatics, 2010Co-Authors: Cynthia Lokker, Nancy L Wilczynski, Brian R Haynes, Ann K Mckibbon, Donna Ciliska, Maureen Dobbins, David A Davis, Sharon E. StrausAbstract:BACKGROUND The process of moving research into practice has a number of names including Knowledge Translation (KT). Researchers and decision makers need to be able to readily access the literature on KT for the field to grow and to evaluate the existing evidence. METHODS To develop and validate search filters for finding KT articles in the database Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL). A gold standard database was constructed by hand searching and classifying articles from 12 journals as KT Content, KT Applications and KT Theory. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Sensitivity, specificity, precision, and accuracy of the search filters. RESULTS Optimized search filters had fairly low sensitivity and specificity for KT Content (58.4% and 64.9% respectively), while sensitivity and specificity increased for retrieving KT Application (67.5% and 70.2%) and KT Theory articles (70.4% and 77.8%). CONCLUSION Search filter performance was suboptimal marking the broad base of disciplines and vocabularies used by KT researchers. Such diversity makes retrieval of KT studies in CINAHL difficult.
