How funding agencies can support research use in healthcare: an online province-wide survey to determine knowledge translation training needs

Implementation Science

Gayle Scarrow²  Kara Schell²  Megan Schellenberg¹  Bev J Holmes² 

[1] Mental Health Commission of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada;Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research, Vancouver, BC, Canada

关键词: Evidence use;    Health research funder;    Health research capacity building;    Evidence-based decision making;    Knowledge translation;   

Others  :  801050
DOI  :  10.1186/1748-5908-9-71

 received in 2013-11-20, accepted in 2014-05-30,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Health research funding agencies are increasingly promoting evidence use in health practice and policy. Building on work suggesting how agencies can support such knowledge translation (KT), this paper discusses an online survey to assess KT training needs of researchers and research users as part of a Canadian provincial capacity-building effort.

Methods

The survey comprised 24 multiple choice and open-ended questions including demographics, interest in learning KT skills, likelihood of participating in training, and barriers and facilitators to doing KT at work. More than 1,200 people completed the survey. The high number of responses is attributed to an engagement strategy involving partner organizations (health authorities, research institutes, universities) in survey development and distribution. SPSS was used to analyze quantitative results according to respondents’ primary role, geographic region, and work setting. Qualitative results were analyzed in NVivo.

Results

Over 85 percent of respondents are interested in learning more about the top KT skills identified. Research producers have higher interest in disseminating research results; research users are more interested in the application of research results. About one-half of respondents require beginner-level training in KT skills; one-quarter need advanced training. Time and cost constraints are the biggest barriers to participating in KT training. More than one-half of respondents have no financial support for travel and almost one-half lack support for registration fees. Time is the biggest challenge to integrating KT into work.

Conclusions

Online surveys are useful for determining knowledge translation training needs of researchers, research users and ultimately organizations. In this case, findings suggest the importance of considering all aspects of KT in training opportunities, while taking into account different stakeholder interests. Funders can play a role in developing new training opportunities as part of a broad effort, with partners, to build capacity for the use of health research evidence. Survey results would ideally be complemented with an objective needs assessment based on core competencies, and should be acted on in a way that acknowledges the complexity of knowledge translation in healthcare, existing training activities, and the expertise stakeholders already have but may not refer to as knowledge translation.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Holmes et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Canadian Institutes for Health Research: Knowledge Translation Definition. http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/39033.html webcite
• [2]Grimshaw JM, Eccles MP, Lavis JN, Hill SJ, Squires JE: Knowledge translation of research findings. Implementation Science 2012, 7:50. BioMed Central Full Text
• [3]Davis D, Davis ME, Jadad A, Perrier L, Rath D, Ryan D, Sibbald G, Straus S, Rappolt S, Wowk M, Zwarenstein M: The case for knowledge translation: shortening the journey from evidence to effect. BMJ 2003, 327:33.
• [4]Kerner JF: Knowledge translation versus knowledge integration: a ‘funder’s’ perspective. J Contin Educ Health Prof 2006, 26(1):72-80. Winter
• [5]Pierson L, Ciliska D, Dobbins M, Mowat D: Building capacity for evidence informed decision making in public health: a case study of organizational change. BMC Public Health 2012, 12:137. BioMed Central Full Text
• [6]Boaz A, Baeza J, Fraser A, and the European Implementation Score Collaborative Group (EIS): Effective implementation of research into practice: an overview of systematic reviews of the health literature. BMC Research Notes 2011, 4:212. BioMed Central Full Text
• [7]Stetler CB, Ritchie JA, Rycroft-Malone J, Schultz AA, Charns MP: Institutionalizing evidence-based practice: an organizational case study using a model of strategic change. Implementation Science 2009, 4:78. BioMed Central Full Text
• [8]Glasgow RE, Emmons KM: How can we increase translation of research into practice? Types of evidence needed. Annu Rev Public Health 2007, 28:413-433.
• [9]Choi BC, Pang T, Lin V, Puska P, Sherman G, Goddard M, Ackland MJ, Sainsbury P, Stachenko S, Morrison H, Clottey C: Can scientists and policy makers work together? J Epidemiol Community Health 2005, 59(8):632-637.
• [10]Oliver K, Innvar S, Lorenc T, Woodman J, Thomas J: A systematic review of barriers to and facilitators of the use of evidence by policymakers. BMC Health Services Research 2014, 14:2. BioMed Central Full Text
• [11]Wilson PM, Petticrew M, Calnan MW, Nazareth I: Disseminating research findings: what should researchers do? A systematic scoping review of conceptual frameworks. Implementation Science 2010, 5:91.
• [12]Holmes B, Scarrow G, Schellenberg M: Translating evidence into practice: the role of health research funders. Implementation Science 2012, 7:39. BioMed Central Full Text
• [13]Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Muir Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS: Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ 1996, 312:71-72.
• [14]Ward V, Smith S, House A, Hamer S: Exploring knowledge exchange: a useful framework for practice and policy. Social Science & Medicine 2012, 74(3):297-304.
• [15]Norman CD, Charnaw-Burger J, Yip AL, Saad S, Lombardo C: Designing health innovation networks using complexity science and systems thinking: the CoNEKTR model. J Eval Clin Pract 2010, 16(5):1016-1023.
• [16]Gaglardi AR, Perrier L, Webster F, Leslie K, Bell M, Levinson W, Rotstein O, Tourangeau A, Morrison L, Silver IL, Straus SE: Exploring mentorship as a strategy to build capacity for knowledge translation research and practice: protocol for a qualitative study. Implementation Science 2009, 4:55. BioMed Central Full Text
• [17]Davis D, Davis N: Educational interventions. In Knowledge Translation in Healthcare: Moving from Evidence to Practice. Edited by Straus S, Tetroe J, Graham G. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell; 2009:113-122.
• [18]Ellen ME, Léon G, Bouchard G, Lavis JN, Ouimet M, Grimshaw JM: What supports do health system organizations have in place to facilitate evidence-informed decision-making? A qualitative study. Implementation Science 2013, 8:84. BioMed Central Full Text
• [19]Potter C, Brough R: Systemic capacity building: a hierarchy of needs. Health Policy Plan 2004, 19(5):336-345.
• [20]Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research: Building research capacity within the BC health authorities: a report on the evaluation of the Health Authority Capacity Building program. http://www.msfhr.org/resources/public/Reports/HACB_Evaluation_Report.pdf webcite
• [21]Wright KB: Researching Internet-based populations: advantages and disadvantages of online survey research, online questionnaire authoring software packages, and web survey services. J of Computer-Mediated Communication 2005, 10:00.
• [22]Evans JR, Mathur A: The value of online surveys. Internet Research 2005, 15(2):195-219.
• [23]Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, and Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada: Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans, December 2010. http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/pdf/eng/tcps2/TCPS_2_FINAL_Web.pdf webcite
• [24]Checklist for quality improvement/quality assurance/program evaluation/curriculum development studies requiring ethical review The University of British Columbiahttp://research.ubc.ca/sites/research.ubc.ca/files/uploads/BREB_ChecklistForResearchRequiringEthicsReview.pdf webcite
• [25]Straus SE, Brouwers M, Johnson D, Lavis JN, Légaré F, Majumdar SR, Ann MKK, Sales AE, Stacey D, Klein G, Grimshaw J, for KT Canada Strategic Training Initiative in Health Research (STIHR): Core competencies in the science and practice of knowledge translation: description of a Canadian strategic training initiative. Implementation Science 2011, 6:127. BioMed Central Full Text
• [26]Hanney S, Boaz A, Jones T, Soper B: Engagement in research: an innovative three-stage review of the benefits for health-care performance. Health Serv Deliv Res 2013., 1(8) http://www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/86455/FullReport-hsdr01080.pdf webcite
• [27]Vanek EP, Carey WD, Secic M, Jackman DM, Fleshler B: Value of needs assessment surveys. J Contin Educ Health Prof 1994, 14(4):224-231.
• [28]Best A, Holmes B: Systems thinking, knowledge and action: towards better models and methods. Invited Paper Spec Issue Evid Policy 2010, 6(2):145-159.
• [29]Ward V, House A, Hamer S: Developing a framework for transferring knowledge into action: a thematic analysis of the literature. J Heal Serv Res Policy 2009, 14(3):156-164.