Conceptualising the initiation of researcher and research user partnerships: a meta-narrative review

Determining the destination: a co-designed chronic advanced cancer rehabilitation conceptual framework for engagement of individuals with lived experience in rehabilitation research

BACKGROUND

Individuals living with chronic advanced cancer (CAC) often face distinct physical, functional, and cognitive issues. Their rehabilitation needs are not yet routinely met, warranting further CAC-specific rehabilitation-based research. Given the complexity of functional and symptom presentations, engagement of individuals living with CAC as partners in the research process is encouraged to better understand the lived perspective. Formal engagement requires both structured approaches and iterative processes. The aim was to co-design a conceptual framework to develop and integrate engagement strategies into rehabilitation research focused on CAC populations.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary team of authors, including two individuals with lived experience, conducted an implementation-focused descriptive study to inform future research design, including: interviews and follow-up, review of current models and approaches, and development of a co-designed conceptual framework for engaging individuals with lived experience into CAC-specific rehabilitation research.

RESULTS

Emergent themes include shared understanding, transparent appreciation, iterative processes and unique partnership needs. A definition, guiding principles and tools for engagement were identified. In consultation with individuals with lived experience, and application of the emergent themes in context, a conceptual framework to guide the engagement process was developed.

CONCLUSION

A novel conceptual framework for engaging individuals with lived experience with CAC as partners in rehabilitation research is proposed to facilitate implementation-focused team-based approaches for this population.

The health service perspective on determinants of success in allied health student research project collaborations: a qualitative study guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research

BACKGROUND

A research culture in health care organisations is associated with improved healthcare performance. Allied health (AH) students undertake research training as part of their professional degree qualifications. This may include participation in research projects, sometimes undertaken in association with health services. Co-supervision of these projects by health service staff provides research capacity building opportunities and staff-centred outcomes for the individuals involved, as well as improvements in clinical knowledge and practice within the local area. Also, publications from these projects contribute to the wider evidence base. Identification of barriers and facilitators to engagement in, and conduct of, these projects may optimise systems for improved health service outcomes.

METHODS

This formative evaluation used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to guide analysis of qualitative data obtained from semi-structured interviews with health service-employed allied health professionals, including clinicians and research fellows, who had supervised students on clinical-related research placements within the previous five years.

RESULTS

Eleven AH clinicians described 18 collaborative projects with 24 students from five AH disciplines across four universities. Three health service-employed AH research fellows described their involvement in these and other student research projects. Twenty key determinant constructs were identified and mapped across all five CFIR domains. Facilitators included health service cosmopolitanism, project adaptability and implementation climate (compatibility). Health service-employed research fellows provided readiness for implementation and a facilitator for project execution. The main barriers identified were cost to staff in workload and personal time and aspects related to project complexity. Differing student characteristics affected the relative advantage of collaborative projects in positive and negative manners.

CONCLUSIONS

This study describes the facilitators and barriers to the conduct of collaborative AH student research projects. Addressing these determinants when establishing each new project may enable health services to optimise communication, role delineation and project success, and thus ultimately, healthcare performance and patient care.

Reconceptualizing Integrated Knowledge Translation goals: a case study on basic and clinical science investigating the causes and consequences of food allergy

BACKGROUND

Integrated Knowledge Translation (IKT) and other forms of research co-production are increasingly recognized as valuable approaches to knowledge creation as a way to better facilitate the implementation of scientific findings. However, the nature of some scientific work can preclude direct knowledge to action as a likely outcome. Do IKT approaches have value in such cases?

METHODS

This study used a qualitative case study approach to better understand the function of IKT in a non-traditional application: basic and clinical science investigating the causes and consequences of food allergy. Building off previous baseline findings, data were obtained through in-depth interviews with project scientists and steering committee members and complemented by researcher observation. Data were analyzed through an integrated approach to understand how well participants perceived the stipulated project IKT outcomes had been met and to better understand the relationship between different forms of IKT goals, outcomes, and impacts.

RESULTS

We propose a conceptual model which builds temporal continuity into the IKT work and understands success beyond truncated timelines of any one project. The model proposes project IKT goals be conceptualized through three metaphorical tower blocks: foundational (changing the culture for both scientists and knowledge-users), laying the groundwork (building relationships, networks and sparking scientific inquiry), and putting scientific knowledge to action. Based on this model, this case study demonstrated notable success at the foundational and intermediate blocks, though did not turn basic and clinical research knowledge into actionable outcomes within the project timespan.

CONCLUSIONS

We find that current IKT literature which situates success as filling a knowledge to action gap is conceptually inadequate for understanding the full contributions of IKT activities. This work highlights the need for building cultural and scientific familiarity with IKT in order to better enable knowledge to action translation. Improving understanding and communication of science and empowering knowledge-users to engage with the research agenda are long-term strategies to build towards knowledge implementation and lay the ground work for many future research projects.

A review of reviews exploring patient and public involvement in population health research and development of tools containing best practice guidance

INTRODUCTION

Patient and public involvement (PPI) is increasingly seen as something that is integral to research and of importance to research funders. There is general recognition that PPI is the right thing to do for both moral and practical reasons. The aim of this review of reviews is to examine how PPI can be done 'properly' by looking at the evidence that exists from published reviews and assessing it against the UK Standards for Public Involvement in Research, as well as examining the specific features of population health research that can make PPI more challenging.

METHODS

A review of reviews and development of best practice guidance was carried out following the 5-stage Framework Synthesis method.

RESULTS

In total 31 reviews were included. There is a lack of current research or clarity around Governance and Impact when findings are mapped against UK Standards for Public Involvement in Research. It was also clear that there is little knowledge around PPI with under-represented groups. There are gaps in knowledge about how to ensure key specific attributes of population health research are addressed for PPI team members - particularly around how to deal with complexity and the data-driven nature of the research. Four tools were produced for researchers and PPI members to further improve their PPI activity within population health research and health research more generally, including a framework of recommended actions to address PPI in population health research, and guidance on integrating PPI based on the UK Standards for Public Involvement in Research.

CONCLUSIONS

Facilitating PPI in population health research is challenging due to the nature of this type of research and there is far less evidence on how to do PPI well in this context. The tools can help researchers identify key aspects of PPI that can be integrated when designing PPI within projects. Findings also highlight specific areas where more research or discussion is needed.

A scoping review to identify and describe the characteristics of theories, models and frameworks of health research partnerships

Background

Engaging users of health research, namely knowledge users, as partners in the research process may to lead to evidence that is more relevant to the users. This may optimize the uptake of evidence in healthcare practice, resulting in improved health outcomes or more efficient healthcare systems. However, barriers to involving knowledge users in the research process exist. Theories, models and frameworks may help guide the process of involving knowledge users and address barriers to engaging with knowledge users in research; however, there is little evidence identifying or describing the theories, models and frameworks of health research partnerships.

Objectives

Identify and describe theories, models and frameworks of health research partnerships. Report on concepts of knowledge user engagement represented in identified theories, models and frameworks.

Methods

We conducted a scoping review. Database (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PCORI) and ancestry and snowball searches were utilized. Included articles were written in English, published between January 2005 and June 2021, specific to health, a research partnership, and referred to a theory, model or framework. No critical appraisal was conducted. We developed a coding framework to extract details related to the publication (e.g. country, year) and theory, model or framework (e.g. intended users, theoretical underpinning, methodology, methods of development, purpose, concepts of knowledge user engagement). One reviewer conducted data extraction. Descriptive statistics and narrative synthesis were utilized to report the results.

Results

We identified 21 874 articles in screening. Thirty-nine models or frameworks were included in data analysis, but no theory. Two models or frameworks (5%) were underpinned by theory. Literature review was the method (n = 11, 28%) most frequently used to develop a model or framework. Guiding or managing a partnership was the most frequently reported purpose of the model/framework (n = 14, 36%). The most represented concept of knowledge user engagement was principles/values (n = 36, 92%).

Conclusions

The models and frameworks identified could be utilized by researchers and knowledge users to inform aspects of a health research partnership, such as guidance or implementation of a partnership. Future research evaluating the quality and applicability of the models and frameworks is necessary to help partners decide which model or framework to implement.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12961-022-00877-4.

Using knowledge brokering activities to promote allied health clinicians' engagement in research: a qualitative exploration

INTRODUCTION

Engaging clinicians in research can improve healthcare organisational performance, patient and staff satisfaction. Emerging evidence suggests that knowledge brokering activities potentially support clinicians' research engagement, but it is unclear how best they should be used.

OBJECTIVES

This study explores how embedded researchers utilised knowledge brokering activities to engage research interested clinicians in research.

DESIGN

A longitudinal qualitative interview based study was co-designed to investigate how experienced research fellows utilise knowledge brokering activities to facilitate allied health clinicians' engagement in research.

SETTING

In one large tertiary level, regional Australian health service, research fellows were matched with research interested clinicians.

METHODS

Qualitative analysis of three longitudinal semi-structured interviews for each research fellow was undertaken. Initial descriptions of their utilisation of knowledge brokering activities were deductively coded. Reflexive thematic analysis was utilised to generate a shared explanation of clinicians' engagement in research.

RESULTS

Three research fellows facilitated 21 clinicians' participation in and leadership of clinical research projects over 12 months. They utilised all ten key knowledge brokering activities with each clinician, with differing patterns and examples. Research fellows described using linkage and exchange activities of communicating and collaborating with key stakeholders, and they tailored knowledge management products for individual's engagement. Further, they described a broader learning journey where they clarified and monitored individuals' capabilities, motivation and their contextual support for research engagement.

CONCLUSION

When research fellows chose and tailored knowledge brokering activities to align and extend clinicians' research capabilities and motivation, they created individualised learning curriculums to support clinicians' participation in and leadership of local research projects. Health and academic leaders should consider structuring embedded researcher positions to include knowledge brokering roles and activities, specifically for research interested clinicians who are ready to participate in and lead research projects.

Translating research into health practice: a case study of integrated palliative care system in Catalonia, Spain

Purpose

Research findings provide the professional community with knowledge that enables to better understand healthcare interventions. Many authors point out that whilst these findings are valued, the findings are not always translated into healthcare practise. The purpose of the paper is to assess the applicability of the essential elements of an integrated palliative care system (IPCS) found in research into the practise of Osona Palliative Care System (OPCS).

Design/methodology/approach

The study used a qualitative methodology with a case study design. In total, 24 health professionals were interviewed in Osona for the research, and the results were analysed using deductive content analysis.

Findings

The study concludes that research findings can better be translated into specific contexts by incorporating the needs and characteristics of the system. The process could be a strategy for bridging the research–practise gap.

Originality/value

Combining the findings from the study and the findings found in the literature reviewed led to the creation of the IPCS-elements-blended model of research and practise. Such a kind of mixed model could be used in other studies seeking to overcome the research and practice gap.

Trainee-led research using an integrated knowledge translation or other research partnership approaches: a scoping reviews

BACKGROUND

There are increasing expectations for researchers and knowledge users in the health system to use a research partnership approach, such as integrated knowledge translation, to increase the relevance and use of research findings in health practice, programmes and policies. However, little is known about how health research trainees engage in research partnership approaches such as IKT. In response, the purpose of this scoping review was to map and characterize the evidence related to using an IKT or other research partnership approach from the perspective of health research trainees in thesis and/or postdoctoral work.

METHODS

We conducted this scoping review following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and Arksey and O'Malley's framework. We searched the following databases in June 2020: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO. We also searched sources of unpublished studies and grey literature. We reported our findings in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews.

RESULTS

We included 74 records that described trainees' experiences using an IKT or other research partnership approach to health research. The majority of studies involved collaboration with knowledge users in the research question development, recruitment and data collection stages of the research process. Intersecting barriers to IKT or other research partnerships at the individual, interpersonal and organizational levels were reported, including lack of skills in partnership research, competing priorities and trainees' "outsider" status. We also identified studies that evaluated their IKT approach and reported impacts on partnership formation, such as valuing different perspectives, and enhanced relevance of research.

CONCLUSION

Our review provides insights for trainees interested in IKT or other research partnership approaches and offers guidance on how to apply an IKT approach to their research. The review findings can serve as a basis for future reviews and primary research focused on IKT principles, strategies and evaluation. The findings can also inform IKT training efforts such as guideline development and academic programme development.

Using an integrated knowledge translation or other research partnership approach in trainee-led research: a scoping review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Collaborative research approaches, such as co-production, co-design, engaged scholarship and integrated knowledge translation (IKT), aim to bridge the evidence to practice and policy gap. There are multiple benefits of collaborative research approaches, but studies report many challenges with establishing and maintaining research partnerships. Researchers often do not have the opportunity to learn how to build collaborative relationships, and most graduate students do not receive formal training in research partnerships. We are unlikely to make meaningful progress in strengthening graduate and postgraduate training on working collaboratively with the health system until we have a better understanding of how students are currently engaging in research partnership approaches. In response, this scoping review aims to map and characterise the evidence related to using an IKT or other research partnership approach from the perspective of health research trainees.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will employ methods described by the Joanna Briggs Institute and Arksey and O'Malley's framework for conducting scoping reviews. The reporting will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for scoping reviews checklist. We will include both published and unpublished grey literature and search the following databases: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global databases, Google Scholar and websites from professional bodies and other organisations. Two reviewers will independently screen the articles and extract data using a standardised data collection form. We will narratively describe quantitative data and conduct a thematic analysis of qualitative data. We will map the IKT and other research partnership activities onto the Knowledge to Action cycle and IAP2 Levels of Engagement Framework.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

No ethical approval is required for this study. We will share the results in a peer-reviewed, open access publication, conference presentation and stakeholder communications.

Understanding collaborative interactions in relation to research impact in social sciences and humanities: A meta-ethnography

The number and type of collaborations between researchers and stakeholders has increased significantly. This responds to the demand from policymakers, funders, and citizens that researchers should help to tackle important social issues (e.g. climate change, healthy aging). However, there is little knowledge about how collaboration processes are experienced, how we can theoretically conceptualize them, and how in this way we can develop efficient collaboration methods that contribute to solving urgent societal problems. In this meta-ethnography, we gathered relevant knowledge from carefully selected qualitative studies. A title/abstract analysis of 3422 articles from Web of Science and ProQuest led to the interpretative analysis of qualitative data from eight publications. The results of this study show that despite the need for a better understanding of complex collaborative interactions, the differences (or asymmetry) between organizations to which various partners belong hinder efficient collaboration. Bridging figures (brokers) can play an essential role if they succeed in drawing diverse stakeholders out of their organizational context into a new dimension that allows creativity and mutual understanding, but that also allows conflict and distortion. In ideal circumstances, this leads to a quasi-automatic transfer of knowledge between partners that takes place naturally and in both directions (knowledge diffusion).

Development of an Online Resource for People Bereaved by Suicide: A Mixed-Method User-Centered Study Protocol

Introduction: Suicide bereavement is known to be highly distressing and is frequently associated with mental health problems. Despite high-level of need regarding mental and physical health, people bereaved by suicide display low level of help-seeking and perceived support in the aftermath of the loss. The lack of accessibility and reliability of face-to-face counseling resources is notably reported by suicide survivors. Online resources can enhance early access to help and support for people bereaved by suicide. The primary objective of the study is to design and implement an innovative and adaptive online resource for people bereaved by suicide according to their needs and expectation regarding online solutions dedicated to suicide bereavement. Methods: The ESPOIR₂S study is a mixed-method user-centered study. ESPOIR₂S seeks to build the resource from the perspectives and needs of both people bereaved by suicide and professionals or volunteers working in the field of postvention. The Information System Research (ISR) Framework is used to guide the design of the study through a 3-step research cycle. The structure of the ESPOIR₂S study relies on a simultaneous collection of qualitative and quantitative data which will be collected and analyzed during (a) the Relevance cycle through an online questionnaire and focus groups; (b) the Design cycle through focus groups; and (c) and the Rigor cycle through an online questionnaire and semi-structured interviews. The user-centeredness will be ensured by the active participation of people bereaved by suicide, members of associations for bereaved people and professionals of postvention. Discussion: The mixed-method and user-centered design of the ESPOIR₂S study will offer an in-depth collection of the needs and expectation of suicide survivors regarding online resources. Through the implementation of an adaptive online solution, we aim to enhance the access to help and support for suicide survivors which are highly correlated with well-being and recovery.

Barriers and facilitators of clinician and researcher collaborations: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

The poor translation of research findings into routine clinical practice is common in all areas of healthcare. Having a better understanding of how researchers and clinicians experience engagement in and with research, their working relationships and expectations of each other, may be one way to help to facilitate collaborative partnerships and therefore increase successful translation of research into clinical practice.

AIMS

To explore the views of clinical and research staff about their experiences of working together during research projects and identify the facilitators and barriers.

METHODS

We conducted four focus groups with 18 participants - clinicians, researchers and those with a dual clinical-research role, recruited from one mental health Trust and one university. Data was analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Eight themes were identified under the headings of two research questions 1) Barriers and facilitators of either engaging in or with research from the perspective of clinical staff, with themes of understanding the benefits of the research; perceived knowledge and personal qualities of researchers; lack of time and organisational support to be involved in and implement research; and lack of feedback about progress and outcome of research. 2) Barriers and facilitators for engaging with clinicians when conducting research, from the perspective of researchers, with themes of understanding what clinicians need to know and how they need to feel to engage with research; demonstrating an understanding of the clinician's world; navigating through the clinical world; and demands of the researcher role.

CONCLUSION

There was agreement between clinicians and researchers about the barriers and facilitators for engaging clinicians in research. Both groups identified that it was the researcher's responsibility to form and maintain good working relationships. Better support for researchers in their role calls for training in communication skills and bespoke training to understand the local context in which research is taking place.

How to strengthen a health research system: WHO's review, whose literature and who is providing leadership?

BACKGROUND

Health research is important for the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals. However, there are many challenges facing health research, including securing sufficient funds, building capacity, producing research findings and using both local and global evidence, and avoiding waste. A WHO initiative addressed these challenges by developing a conceptual framework with four functions to guide the development of national health research systems. Despite some progress, more is needed before health research systems can meet their full potential of improving health systems. The WHO Regional Office for Europe commissioned an evidence synthesis of the systems-level literature. This Opinion piece considers its findings before reflecting on the vast additional literature available on the range of specific health research system functions related to the various challenges. Finally, it considers who should lead research system strengthening.

MAIN TEXT

The evidence synthesis identifies two main approaches for strengthening national health research systems, namely implementing comprehensive and coherent strategies and participation in partnerships. The literature describing these approaches at the systems level also provides data on ways to strengthen each of the four functions of governance, securing financing, capacity-building, and production and use of research. Countries effectively implementing strategies include England, Ireland and Rwanda, whereas West Africa experienced effective partnerships. Recommended policy approaches for system strengthening are context specific. The vast literature on each function and the ever-growing evidence-base are illustrated by considering papers in just one key journal, Health Research Policy and Systems, and analysing the contribution of two national studies. A review of the functions of the Iranian system identifies over 200 relevant and mostly national records; an analysis of the creation of the English National Institute for Health Research describes the key leadership role played by the health department. Furthermore, WHO is playing leadership roles in helping coordinate partnerships within and across health research systems that have been attempting to tackle the COVID-19 crisis.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence synthesis provides a firm basis for decision-making by policy-makers and research leaders looking to strengthen national health research systems within their own national context. It identifies five crucial policy approaches - conducting situation analysis, sustaining a comprehensive strategy, engaging stakeholders, evaluating impacts on health systems, and partnership participation. The vast and ever-growing additional literature could provide further perspectives, including on crucial leadership roles for health ministries.