1
|
Jessani NS, Delobelle P, Balugaba BE, Mpando TL, Ayele FM, Ntawuyirushintege S, Rohwer A. Integrated Knowledge Translation for Non-Communicable Diseases: Stories from Sub-Saharan Africa. Ann Glob Health 2023; 89:87. [PMID: 38077262 PMCID: PMC10705024 DOI: 10.5334/aogh.4228] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/30/2023] [Accepted: 08/11/2023] [Indexed: 12/18/2023] Open
Abstract
Integrated Knowledge Translation (IKT) is a key strategy for contextualising, tailoring, and communicating research for policy and practice. In this viewpoint, we provide examples of how partners from five countries in sub-Saharan Africa used IKT to advance interventions for curbing non-communicable diseases in their contexts and how these strategies were magnified during the COVID-19 pandemic in some cases. The stories highlight the importance of deliberate and reinforced capacity building, authentic relationship enhancement, adaptable and user-informed stakeholder engagement, and agile multi-sectoral involvement.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Peter Delobelle
- Chronic Disease Initiative for Africa, University of Cape Town, South Africa
- Department of Public Health, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium
| | - Bonny Enock Balugaba
- Department of Disease control and Environmental Health, Makerere University School of Public Health, Uganda
| | | | - Firaol Mesfin Ayele
- Non-communicable Disease Research Directorate, Armauer Hansen Research Institute, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
| | - Seleman Ntawuyirushintege
- School of Global and Public Health. Kamuzu University of Health Sciences, Malawi
- School of Public Health of the University of Rwanda
| | - Anke Rohwer
- Centre for Evidence-Based Health Care, Stellenbosch University, South Africa
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Tobin R, Crawford G, Hallett J, Maycock B, Lobo R. Utilizing Causal Loop Diagramming to Explore a Research and Evaluation Capacity Building Partnership. Front Public Health 2022; 10:857918. [PMID: 35712267 PMCID: PMC9194391 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.857918] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/19/2022] [Accepted: 04/12/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
The capacity to engage in research, evaluation and evidence-informed decision-making supports effective public health policy and practice. Little is known about partnership-based approaches that aim to build capacity across a system or how to evaluate them. This study examines the impacts of a research and evaluation capacity building partnership called the Western Australian Sexual Health and Blood-borne Virus Applied Research and Evaluation Network (hereafter, SiREN). SiREN aims to strengthen capacity across a system of clinical and medical services and government and non-government organizations. These organizations are connected through their shared aim of preventing and managing sexually transmissible infections and blood-borne viruses. To examine SiREN, systems concepts and methods were used. Data were collected from SiREN organizational documents (n = 42), a survey tool (n = 104), in-depth interviews (n = 17), a workshop and three meetings with SiREN stakeholders and used to develop two causal loop diagrams. Findings show engagement with SiREN was influenced by a complex interplay of contextual (e.g., organizational capacity) and process (e.g., presence of trusting relationships) factors. SiREN contributed to system level changes, including increased resources for research and evaluation, the development of networks and partnerships that led to more efficient responses to emerging health issues, evidence sharing, and sustainable research and evaluation practice. The use of causal loop diagrams enabled the identification of key leverage points that SiREN can use for continuous improvement or evaluation. The focus on how contextual factors influenced SiREN's ability to create change provides valuable information for researchers, policymakers or practitioners seeking to develop a similar partnership.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rochelle Tobin
- Collaboration for Evidence, Research and Impact in Public Health, School of Population Health, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia
| | - Gemma Crawford
- Collaboration for Evidence, Research and Impact in Public Health, School of Population Health, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia
| | - Jonathan Hallett
- Collaboration for Evidence, Research and Impact in Public Health, School of Population Health, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia
| | - Bruce Maycock
- European Centre for Environment and Human Health, College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom
| | - Roanna Lobo
- Collaboration for Evidence, Research and Impact in Public Health, School of Population Health, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Dhaliwal B, Neil-Sztramko SE, Boston-Fisher N, Buckeridge DL, Dobbins M. Assessing the Electronic Evidence System Needs of Canadian Public Health Professionals: Cross-sectional Study. JMIR Public Health Surveill 2021; 7:e26503. [PMID: 34491205 PMCID: PMC8456326 DOI: 10.2196/26503] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/14/2020] [Revised: 05/26/2021] [Accepted: 06/02/2021] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND True evidence-informed decision-making in public health relies on incorporating evidence from a number of sources in addition to traditional scientific evidence. Lack of access to these types of data as well as ease of use and interpretability of scientific evidence contribute to limited uptake of evidence-informed decision-making in practice. An electronic evidence system that includes multiple sources of evidence and potentially novel computational processing approaches or artificial intelligence holds promise as a solution to overcoming barriers to evidence-informed decision-making in public health. OBJECTIVE This study aims to understand the needs and preferences for an electronic evidence system among public health professionals in Canada. METHODS An invitation to participate in an anonymous web-based survey was distributed via listservs of 2 Canadian public health organizations in February 2019. Eligible participants were English- or French-speaking individuals currently working in public health. The survey contained both multiple-choice and open-ended questions about the needs and preferences relevant to an electronic evidence system. Quantitative responses were analyzed to explore differences by public health role. Inductive and deductive analysis methods were used to code and interpret the qualitative data. Ethics review was not required by the host institution. RESULTS Respondents (N=371) were heterogeneous, spanning organizations, positions, and areas of practice within public health. Nearly all (364/371, 98.1%) respondents indicated that an electronic evidence system would support their work. Respondents had high preferences for local contextual data, research and intervention evidence, and information about human and financial resources. Qualitative analyses identified several concerns, needs, and suggestions for the development of such a system. Concerns ranged from the personal use of such a system to the ability of their organization to use such a system. Recognized needs spanned the different sources of evidence, including local context, research and intervention evidence, and resources and tools. Additional suggestions were identified to improve system usability. CONCLUSIONS Canadian public health professionals have positive perceptions toward an electronic evidence system that would bring together evidence from the local context, scientific research, and resources. Elements were also identified to increase the usability of an electronic evidence system.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bandna Dhaliwal
- National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Sarah E Neil-Sztramko
- National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | | | - David L Buckeridge
- School of Population and Global Health, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Maureen Dobbins
- National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
- School of Nursing, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Dahlgren A, Furuseth-Olsen K, Rose CJ, Oxman AD. The Norwegian public's ability to assess treatment claims: results of a cross-sectional study of critical health literacy. F1000Res 2021; 9:179. [PMID: 38585673 PMCID: PMC10995534 DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.21902.2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 07/14/2021] [Indexed: 04/09/2024] Open
Abstract
Background: Few studies have evaluated the ability of the general public to assess the trustworthiness of claims about the effects of healthcare. For the most part, those studies have used self-reported measures of critical health literacy. Methods: We mailed 4500 invitations to Norwegian adults. Respondents were randomly assigned to one of four online questionnaires that included multiple-choice questions that test understanding of Key Concepts people need to understand to assess healthcare claims. They also included questions about intended behaviours and self-efficacy. One of the four questionnaires was identical to one previously used in two randomised trials of educational interventions in Uganda, facilitating comparisons to Ugandan children, parents, and teachers. We adjusted the results using demographic data to reflect the population. Results: A total of 771 people responded. The adjusted proportion of Norwegian adults who answered correctly was < 50% for 17 of the 30 Key Concepts. On the other hand, less than half answered correctly for 13 concepts. The results for Norwegian adults were better than the results for Ugandan children in the intervention arm of the trial and parents, and similar to those of Ugandan teachers in the intervention arm of the trial. Based on self-report, most Norwegians are likely to find out the basis of treatment claims, but few consider it easy to assess whether claims are based on research and to assess the trustworthiness of research. Conclusions: Norwegian adults do not understand many concepts that are essential for assessing healthcare claims and making informed choices. Future interventions should be tailored to address Key Concepts for which there appears to be a lack of understanding.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Astrid Dahlgren
- Centre for Informed Health Choices, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Postboks 222 Skøyen, Oslo, 0213, Norway
| | - Kjetil Furuseth-Olsen
- Centre for Informed Health Choices, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Postboks 222 Skøyen, Oslo, 0213, Norway
| | - Christopher James Rose
- Centre for Informed Health Choices, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Postboks 222 Skøyen, Oslo, 0213, Norway
| | - Andrew David Oxman
- Centre for Informed Health Choices, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Postboks 222 Skøyen, Oslo, 0213, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Varallyay NI, Bennett SC, Kennedy C, Ghaffar A, Peters DH. How does embedded implementation research work? Examining core features through qualitative case studies in Latin America and the Caribbean. Health Policy Plan 2021; 35:ii98-ii111. [PMID: 33156937 PMCID: PMC7646734 DOI: 10.1093/heapol/czaa126] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/03/2020] [Indexed: 01/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Innovative strategies are needed to improve the delivery of evidence-informed health interventions. Embedded implementation research (EIR) seeks to enhance the generation and use of evidence for programme improvement through four core features: (1) central involvement of programme/policy decision-makers in the research cycle; (2) collaborative research partnerships; (3) positioning research within programme processes and (4) research focused on implementation. This paper examines how these features influence evidence-to-action processes and explores how they are operationalized, their effects and supporting conditions needed. We used a qualitative, comparative case study approach, drawing on document analysis and semi-structured interviews across multiple informant groups, to examine three EIR projects in Bolivia, Colombia and the Dominican Republic. Our findings are presented according to the four core EIR features. The central involvement of decision-makers in EIR was enhanced by decision-maker authority over the programme studied, professional networks and critical reflection. Strong research-practice partnerships were facilitated by commitment, a clear and shared purpose and representation of diverse perspectives. Evidence around positioning research within programme processes was less conclusive; however, as all three cases made significant advances in research use and programme improvement, this feature of EIR may be less critical than others, depending on specific circumstances. Finally, a research focus on implementation demanded proactive engagement by decision-makers in conceptualizing the research and identifying opportunities for direct action by decision-makers. As the EIR approach is a novel approach in these low-resource settings, key supports are needed to build capacity of health sector stakeholders and create an enabling environment through system-level strategies. Key implications for such supports include: promoting EIR and creating incentives for decision-makers to engage in it, establishing structures or mechanisms to facilitate decision-maker involvement, allocating funds for EIR, and developing guidance for EIR practitioners.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- N Ilona Varallyay
- Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins School
of Public Health, 615 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD 21205, United States
- Corresponding author. Malabia 1970, Buenos Aires CABA 1414,
Argentina. E-mail:
| | - Sara C Bennett
- Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins School
of Public Health, 615 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD 21205, United States
| | - Caitlin Kennedy
- Social and Behavioral Interventions Program, Department of
International Health, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, 615 N Wolfe St,
Baltimore, MD 21205, United States
| | - Abdul Ghaffar
- The Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research at the
World Health Organization, 20 avenue Appia, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland
| | - David H Peters
- Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins School
of Public Health, 615 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD 21205, United States
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Oxman AD, García LM. Comparison of the Informed Health Choices Key Concepts Framework to other frameworks relevant to teaching and learning how to think critically about health claims and choices: a systematic review. F1000Res 2020; 9:164. [PMID: 33224475 PMCID: PMC7670481 DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.21858.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 02/24/2020] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: The Informed Health Choices (IHC) Key Concepts are principles for evaluating the trustworthiness of claims about treatment effects. The Key Concepts provide a framework for developing learning-resources to help people use the concepts when treatment claims are made, and when they make health choices. Objective: To compare the framework provided by the IHC Key Concepts to other frameworks intended to promote critical thinking about treatment (intervention) claims and choices. Methods: We identified relevant frameworks from reviews of frameworks, searching Google Scholar, citation searches, and contact with key informants. We included frameworks intended to provide a structure for teaching or learning to think critically about the basis for claims, evidence used to support claims, or informed choices. For a framework to be included, there had to be a description of its purpose; a list of concepts, competences, or dispositions; and definitions of key terms. We made independent assessments of framework eligibility and extracted data for each included framework using standardised forms. Results: Twenty-two frameworks met our inclusion criteria. The purpose of the IHC Framework is similar to that of two frameworks for critical thinking and somewhat similar to that of a framework for evidence-based practice. Those frameworks have broader scopes than the IHC Framework. An important limitation of broad frameworks is that they do not provide an adequate basis (concepts) for deciding which claims to believe and what to do. There was at most some overlap between the concepts, competences, and dispositions in each of the 22 included frameworks and those in the IHC Framework. Conclusions: The IHC Key Concepts Framework appears to be unique. Our review has shown how it and other frameworks can be improved by taking account of the ways in which other related frameworks have been developed, evaluated, and made useful.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrew D Oxman
- Centre for Informed Health Choices, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.,University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Laura Martínez García
- Iberoamerican Cochrane Centre, Sant Pau Biomedical Research Institute, Barcelona, Spain.,CIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health, Barcelona, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Zhao N, Chung M, Lischko A, Koch-Weser S. Knowledge Translation and WIC Food Package Regulation Change. J Am Coll Nutr 2020; 40:598-607. [PMID: 32915695 DOI: 10.1080/07315724.2020.1810170] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/23/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Knowledge Translation (KT) is the exchange, synthesis, and ethically-sound application of knowledge. A case study methodology is used to examine KT at the organizational level of the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) program. METHOD The study used purposeful sampling to select WIC informants from state WIC agencies to participate in semi-structured interviews about their individual experiences during the 2009 WIC regulation change process. Thematic coding of retrospective semi-structured interviews with key informants from WIC state agencies revealed key components of the state-level WIC regulation implementation process, and key constructs of Organizational Readiness for Knowledge Translation in the WIC program. RESULTS WIC informants highlight that decisions made by WIC state agencies regarding how to appraise, synthesize, and adapt evidence or regulation change are constrained by the KT decisions made by federal agencies. WIC state agencies should assess their level of readiness for KT in terms of 1) innovation readiness; 2) personal readiness; and 3) institutional readiness. CONCLUSIONS This WIC case study can help decision-makers to understand the KT process of implementing evidence-informed regulation changes, identify factors that could influence states' ability to be prepared for implementing changes, and gauge "practicality" of future WIC regulation changes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Naisi Zhao
- Department of Public Health and Community Medicine, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Mei Chung
- Department of Public Health and Community Medicine, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Amy Lischko
- Department of Public Health and Community Medicine, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Susan Koch-Weser
- Department of Public Health and Community Medicine, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Varallyay NI, Langlois EV, Tran N, Elias V, Reveiz L. Health system decision-makers at the helm of implementation research: development of a framework to evaluate the processes and effectiveness of embedded approaches. Health Res Policy Syst 2020; 18:64. [PMID: 32522238 PMCID: PMC7288439 DOI: 10.1186/s12961-020-00579-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/06/2019] [Accepted: 05/21/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Embedded approaches to implementation research (IR), whereby health system decision-makers participate actively in the research process, are gaining traction as effective approaches to optimise the delivery of health programmes and policies. However, the evidence base on the processes and effectiveness of such collaborative research remains inchoate. Standardised approaches to evaluate these initiatives are needed to identify core elements of ‘embeddedness’, unveil the underlying pathways of change, and assess contribution to evidence uptake in decision-making and overall outcomes of effect. The framework presented in this paper responds to this need, designed to guide the systematic evaluation of embedded IR. Methods This evaluation framework for embedded IR approaches is based on the experience of a joint initiative by the Pan American Health Organization/Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research, which has supported 19 IR grants in 10 Latin American and Caribbean countries from 2014 to 2017. The conceptualisation of this framework drew on various sources of information, including empirical evidence and conceptual insights from the literature, interviews with content experts, and a prospective evaluation of the 2016 cohort that included semi-structured key informant interviews, document analysis, and a research team survey to examine key aspects of embedded research. Results We developed a widely applicable conceptual framework to guide the evaluation of embedded IR in various contexts. Focused on uncovering how this collaborative research approach influences programme improvement, it outlines expected processes and intermediate outcomes. It also highlights constructs with which to assess ‘embeddedness’ as well as critical contextual factors. The framework is intended to provide a structure by which to systematically examine such embedded research initiatives, proposing three key stages of evidence-informed decision-making – co-production of evidence, engagement with research, and enactment of programme changes. Conclusion Rigorous evaluation of embedded IR is needed to build the evidence on its processes and effectiveness in influencing decision-making. The evaluation framework presented here addresses this gap with consideration of the complexity of such efforts. Its applicability to similar initiatives is bolstered by virtue of being founded on real-world experience; its potential to contribute to a nuanced understanding of embedded IR is significant.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- N Ilona Varallyay
- Department of International Health of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, United States of America.
| | - Etienne V Langlois
- Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research, World Health Organization, 20 Avenue Appia, 1211, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Nhan Tran
- Unintentional Injury Prevention Department for the Management of Non-communicable Diseases, Disability, Violence, and Injury Prevention (NVI), World Health Organization, 20 Avenue Appia, 1211, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Vanesa Elias
- Department of Evidence and Intelligence for Action in Health, Pan American Health Organization, 525 Twenty-third Street, N.W, Washington, D.C, USA
| | - Ludovic Reveiz
- Department of Evidence and Intelligence for Action in Health, Pan American Health Organization, 525 Twenty-third Street, N.W, Washington, D.C, USA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Jessani NS, Valmeekanathan A, Babcock C, Ling B, Davey-Rothwell MA, Holtgrave DR. Exploring the evolution of engagement between academic public health researchers and decision-makers: from initiation to dissolution. Health Res Policy Syst 2020; 18:15. [PMID: 32039731 PMCID: PMC7011533 DOI: 10.1186/s12961-019-0516-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/28/2019] [Accepted: 12/10/2019] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
CONTEXT Relationships between researchers and decision-makers have demonstrated positive potential to influence research, policy and practice. Over time, interest in better understanding the relationships between the two parties has grown as demonstrated by a plethora of studies globally. However, what remains elusive is the evolution of these vital relationships and what can be learned from them with respect to advancing evidence-informed decision-making. We therefore explored the nuances around the initiation, maintenance and dissolution of academic-government relationships. METHODS We conducted in-depth interviews with 52 faculty at one school of public health and 24 government decision-makers at city, state, federal and global levels. Interviews were transcribed and coded deductively and inductively using Atlas.Ti. Responses across codes and respondents were extracted into an Excel matrix and compared in order to identify key themes. FINDINGS Eight key drivers to engagement were identified, namely (1) decision-maker research needs, (2) learning, (3) access to resources, (4) student opportunities, (5) capacity strengthening, (6) strategic positioning, (7) institutional conditionalities, and (8) funder conditionalities. There were several elements that enabled initiation of relationships, including the role of faculty members in the decision-making process, individual attributes and reputation, institutional reputation, social capital, and the role of funders. Maintenance of partnerships was dependent on factors such as synergistic collaboration (i.e. both benefit), mutual trust, contractual issues and funding. Dissolution of relationships resulted from champions changing/leaving positions, engagement in transactional relationships, or limited mutual trust and respect. CONCLUSIONS As universities and government agencies establish relationships and utilise opportunities to share ideas, envision change together, and leverage their collaborations to use evidence to inform decision-making, a new modus operandi becomes possible. Embracing the individual, institutional, networked and systems dynamics of relationships can lead to new practices, alternate approaches and transformative change. Government agencies, schools of public health and higher education institutions more broadly, should pay deliberate attention to identifying and managing the various drivers, enablers and disablers for relationship initiation and resilience in order to promote more evidence-informed decision-making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nasreen S Jessani
- Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, United States of America.
- Center for Evidence Based Health Care, Department of Global Health, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa.
- Africa Centre for Evidence, Faculty of Humanities, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa.
| | - Akshara Valmeekanathan
- Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, United States of America
| | - Carly Babcock
- Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, United States of America
| | - Brenton Ling
- Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, United States of America
| | - Melissa A Davey-Rothwell
- Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, United States of America
| | - David R Holtgrave
- School of Public Health, University at Albany, State University of New York, Rensselaer, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Dubois A, Lévesque M. Canada's National Collaborating Centres: Facilitating evidence-informed decision-making in public health. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2020; 46:31-5. [PMID: 32167080 DOI: 10.14745/ccdr.v46i23a02] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
Although evidence-informed decision-making is fundamental to public health, it is challenging in practice as there is a continual burgeoning of both evidence and emerging issues, which public health professionals need to address at local, regional and national levels. One way that Canada has addressed this perennial challenge is through its six National Collaborating Centres (NCCs). The NCCs for Public Health were created to promote and support the use of scientific research and other knowledge to strengthen public health practice, programs and policies in Canada. The NCCs identify knowledge gaps, foster networks across sectors and jurisdictions and provide the public health system with an array of evidence-informed resources and knowledge translation services. Each centre is hosted in academic or government organizations across Canada and focuses on a specific public health priority: Determinants of Health; Environmental Health; Healthy Public Policy; Indigenous Health; Infectious Diseases; and Knowledge Translation Methods and Tools. Since their launch in 2005, the NCCs have undergone two federal evaluations, the results of which clearly demonstrate their significant contribution to evidence-informed decision-making in public health in Canada, while identifying some opportunities for future growth. The NCCs successfully help to bridge the gaps between evidence, policy and practice and facilitate the implementation of evidence in multiple, often complex, settings.
Collapse
|
11
|
Khalid AF, Lavis JN, El-Jardali F, Vanstone M. Stakeholders' experiences with the evidence aid website to support 'real-time' use of research evidence to inform decision-making in crisis zones: a user testing study. Health Res Policy Syst 2019; 17:106. [PMID: 31888658 PMCID: PMC6936118 DOI: 10.1186/s12961-019-0498-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/13/2019] [Accepted: 10/22/2019] [Indexed: 02/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Humanitarian action in crisis zones is fraught with many challenges, including lack of timely and accessible research evidence to inform decision-making about humanitarian interventions. Evidence websites have the potential to address this challenge. Evidence Aid is the only evidence website designed for crisis zones that focuses on providing research evidence in the form of systematic reviews. The objective of this study is to explore stakeholders’ views of Evidence Aid, contributing further to our understanding of the use of research evidence in decision-making in crisis zones. Methods We designed a qualitative user-testing study to collect interview data from stakeholders about their impressions of Evidence Aid. Eligible stakeholders included those with and without previous experience of Evidence Aid. All participants were either currently working or have worked within the last year in a crisis zone. Participants were asked to perform the same user experience-related tasks and answer questions about this experience and their knowledge needs. Data were analysed using a deductive framework analysis approach drawing on Morville’s seven facets of the user experience — findability, usability, usefulness, desirability, accessibility, credibility and value. Results A total of 31 interviews were completed with senior decision-makers (n = 8), advisors (n = 7), field managers (n = 7), analysts/researchers (n = 5) and healthcare providers (n = 4). Participant self-reported knowledge needs varied depending on their role. Overall, participants did not identify any ‘major’ problems (highest order) and identified only two ‘big’ problems (second highest order) with using the Evidence Aid website, namely the lack of a search engine on the home page and that some full-text articles linked to/from the site require a payment. Participants identified seven specific suggestions about how to improve Evidence Aid, many of which can also be applied to other evidence websites. Conclusions Stakeholders in crisis zones found Evidence Aid to be useful, accessible and credible. However, they experienced some problems with the lack of a search engine on the home page and the requirement for payment for some full-text articles linked to/from the site.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ahmad Firas Khalid
- Health Policy PhD Program, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada. .,Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada. .,Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
| | - John N Lavis
- Health Policy PhD Program, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.,Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.,Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.,McMaster Health Forum, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.,Department of Political Science, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Fadi El-Jardali
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.,Department of Health Management & Policy, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.,Center for Systematic Review in Health Policy and Systems Research (SPARK), American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.,Knowledge to Policy (K2P) Center, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon
| | - Meredith Vanstone
- Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.,Department of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Oronje RN, Murunga VI, Zulu EM. Strengthening capacity to use research evidence in health sector policy-making: experience from Kenya and Malawi. Health Res Policy Syst 2019; 17:101. [PMID: 31856848 PMCID: PMC6923846 DOI: 10.1186/s12961-019-0511-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/02/2019] [Accepted: 11/26/2019] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Among the many barriers to evidence use in decision-making, weak capacity for evidence use has attracted a lot of focus in the last decade. The study aims to inform and enrich ongoing and future efforts to strengthen capacity for evidence use by presenting and discussing the experiences and lessons of a project implemented in Kenya and Malawi to strengthen individual and institutional capacity for evidence use within the ministries of health (MoHs). Methods This paper draws on the internal and external evaluations of a 3-year project funded by the United Kingdom’s Department for International Development, the Strengthening Capacity to Use Research Evidence in Health Policy (SECURE Health). To strengthen individual capacity, the project implemented a training and mentorship programme for 60 mid-level policy-makers in the two MoHs. To strengthen institutional capacity, the project conducted sustained advocacy with top leaders to strengthen structures that enable evidence-informed decision-making (EIDM), supported Kenya to develop research-for-health policies and priorities, supported Malawi to review the implementation of its health research agenda, developed EIDM guidelines for both MoHs, and supported bi-annual evidence dialogues to improve interactions and raise the profile of evidence. Internal evaluation included baseline and endline surveys (93 baseline and 92 endline interviews), 60 in-depth interviews, and intervention-specific evaluations (pre–post tests for training workshops, feedback forms for policy dialogues and tracking effects of advocacy efforts). The external evaluation was implemented alongside project implementation, conducting three annual evaluations. Results The results show that training and mentorship programmes in EIDM were effective in improving competencies of civil servants. However, such programmes need to train a critical mass to be effective in enhancing EIDM practice at the MoHs. On strengthening institutional capacity for EIDM, while the project achieved some success, it did not realise long-lasting effects because of its limited time of implementation and limited focus on sustained political economy analysis, which meant that the intervention was negatively affected by frequently changing interests within the MoHs. Conclusions Although training and mentorship are effective in improving EIDM competencies, they need to be incorporated in existing pre-service and in-service training programmes for sustainability. Strengthening institutional capacity for evidence use is complex and needs sustained political commitment and long-term investments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rose N Oronje
- African Institute for Development Policy (AFIDEP), P.O. Box 14688-00800, Westlands, Nairobi, Kenya.
| | - Violet I Murunga
- African Institute for Development Policy (AFIDEP), P.O. Box 14688-00800, Westlands, Nairobi, Kenya
| | - Eliya M Zulu
- African Institute for Development Policy (AFIDEP), Lilongwe, Malawi
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Semakula D, Nsangi A, Oxman A, Glenton C, Lewin S, Rosenbaum S, Oxman M, Kaseje M, Austvoll-Dahlgren A, Rose CJ, Fretheim A, Sewankambo N. Informed Health Choices media intervention for improving people's ability to critically appraise the trustworthiness of claims about treatment effects: a mixed-methods process evaluation of a randomised trial in Uganda. BMJ Open 2019; 9:e031510. [PMID: 31852697 PMCID: PMC6937069 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031510] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/18/2019] [Revised: 10/09/2019] [Accepted: 10/29/2019] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
We developed the Informed Health Choices podcast to improve people's ability to assess claims about the effects of treatments. We evaluated the effects of the podcast in a randomised trial. OBJECTIVES We conducted this process evaluation to assess the fidelity of the intervention, identify factors that affected the implementation and impact of the intervention and could affect scaling up, and identify potential adverse and beneficial effects. SETTING The study was conducted in central Uganda in rural, periurban and urban settings. PARTICIPANTS We collected data on parents who were in the intervention arm of the Informed Health Choices study that evaluated an intervention to improve parents' ability to assess treatment effects. PROCEDURES We conducted 84 semistructured interviews during the intervention, 19 in-depth interviews shortly after, two focus group discussions with parents, one focus group discussion with research assistants and two in-depth interviews with the principal investigators. We used framework analysis to manage qualitative data, assessed the certainty of the findings using the GRADE-CERQual (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations-Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research) approach, and organised findings in a logic model. OUTCOMES Proportion of participants listening to all episodes; factors influencing the implementation of the podcast; ways to scale up and any adverse and beneficial effects. RESULTS All participants who completed the study listened to the podcast as intended, perhaps because of the explanatory design and recruitment of parents with a positive attitude. This was also likely facilitated by the podcast being delivered by research assistants, and providing the participants with MP3 players. The podcast was reportedly clear, understandable, credible and entertaining, which motivated them to listen and eased implementation. No additional adverse effects were reported. CONCLUSIONS Participants experienced the podcast positively and were motivated to engage with it. These findings help to explain the short-term effectiveness of the intervention, but not the decrease in effectiveness over the following year.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel Semakula
- Makerere University College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda
- Institute of Health and Society, Faculty of Medicine, Universitetet i Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Allen Nsangi
- Makerere University College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda
- Institute of Health and Society, Faculty of Medicine, Universitetet i Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Andrew Oxman
- Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway
| | | | - Simon Lewin
- Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway
| | | | - Matt Oxman
- Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway
| | - Margaret Kaseje
- Tropical Institute of Community Health and Development, Kisumu, Kenya
| | - Astrid Austvoll-Dahlgren
- East and South, Regional Centre for Child and Youth Mental Health and Child Welfare, Oslo, Norway
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Jessani NS, Hendricks L, Nicol L, Young T. University Curricula in Evidence-Informed Decision Making and Knowledge Translation: Integrating Best Practice, Innovation, and Experience for Effective Teaching and Learning. Front Public Health 2019; 7:313. [PMID: 31850294 PMCID: PMC6901672 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2019.00313] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/27/2019] [Accepted: 10/14/2019] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
As attention to Evidence Informed Decision Making (EIDM) and Knowledge Translation (KT) in research, policy and practice grows, so does a need for capacity enhancement in amongst evidence producers and evidence users. Recognizing that most researchers enter the professional sphere with little or no appreciation of the importance and power of EIDM, the Centre for Evidence-based Health Care at Stellenbosch University, South Africa, spearheaded the development and accreditation of a foundational course titled Evidence-Informed Decision making: The Art, Science and Complexity of knowledge translation. The curriculum draws on the principles of adult learning and effective teaching that includes integrating seven key aspects: (1) extraction of intuitive and tacit knowledge (2) autonomous knowledge generation (3) diverse perspectives (4) learning by doing (5) peer-support and critique (6) facilitator coaching and (7) constant reflection. In this paper, we reflect on these techniques in enhancing understanding and utilization of KT in advancing EIDM. The in-person short course has been offered 5 times since its launch in September 2017 with attendance by ~85 senior researchers and government officials-each of whom left the workshop with three completed outputs: a stakeholder matrix, an engagement strategy for their chosen stakeholder and a plan for evaluating the impact of their KT strategy. Interest in the course has grown considerably: (a) Requests from local institutes of research for dedicated training to their staff; (b) Incorporation into international program partner capacity enhancing strategies; (c) Publication of a book chapter designed using course content; (d) Adaptation and utilization of the templates and tools as teaching resources (e) Informing organizational stakeholder engagement strategies (f) Adaptation of the modules for conference capacity building workshops. In summary, designing courses that take into consideration adult principles of learning is not a new concept. However, effective delivery of such courses is still nascent. We found that integrating the seven aspects mentioned above, including researchers together with decision-makers in the workshops, and having an experienced facilitator is critical for effective learning. Enhancing knowledge and skills "just in time" rather than "just in case" has demonstrated increased potential for immediate relevance, uptake and sustainability.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nasreen S. Jessani
- Division of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Department of Global Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Centre for Evidence-Based Health Care, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa
- Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States
| | - Lynn Hendricks
- Division of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Department of Global Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Centre for Evidence-Based Health Care, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa
- Qualitative Inquiry Group, Faculty of Social Sciences, KU Leuven, Centre for Sociological Research, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Liesl Nicol
- Division of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Department of Global Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Centre for Evidence-Based Health Care, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa
| | - Taryn Young
- Division of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Department of Global Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Centre for Evidence-Based Health Care, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Boyko JA, Riley BL, Willis CD, Stockton L, Zummach D, Kerner J, Robinson K, Chia M. Knowledge translation for realist reviews: a participatory approach for a review on scaling up complex interventions. Health Res Policy Syst 2018; 16:101. [PMID: 30348180 PMCID: PMC6198505 DOI: 10.1186/s12961-018-0374-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/02/2018] [Accepted: 09/24/2018] [Indexed: 11/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Knowledge syntheses that use a realist methodology are gaining popularity. Yet, there are few reports in the literature that describe how results are summarised, shared and used. This paper aims to inform knowledge translation (KT) for realist reviews by describing the process of developing a KT strategy for a review on pathways for scaling up complex public health interventions. Methods The participatory approach used for the realist review was also used to develop the KT strategy. The approach included three main steps, namely (1) an international meeting focused on interpreting preliminary findings from the realist review and seeking input on KT activities; (2) a targeted literature review on KT for realist reviews; and (3) consultations with primary knowledge users of the review. Results The international meeting identified a general preference among knowledge users for findings from the review that are action oriented. A need was also identified for understanding how to tailor findings for specific knowledge user groups in relation to their needs. The literature review identified four papers that included brief descriptions of planned or actual KT activities for specific research studies; however, information was minimal on what KT activities or products work for whom, under what conditions and why. The consultations revealed that KT for realist reviews should consider the following: (1) activities closely aligned with the preferences of specific knowledge user groups; (2) key findings that are sensitive to factors within the knowledge user’s context; and (3) actionable statements that can advance KT goals, activities or products. The KT strategy derived from the three activities includes a planning framework and tailored KT activities that address preferences of knowledge users for findings that are action oriented and context relevant. Conclusions This paper provides an example of a KT strategy for realist reviews that blends theoretical and practical insights. Evaluation of the strategy’s implementation will provide useful insights on its effectiveness and potential for broader application. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12961-018-0374-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer A Boyko
- Propel Centre for Population Health Impact, University of Waterloo, 200 University Ave West, Waterloo, ON, N2L 3G1, Canada.
| | - Barbara L Riley
- Propel Centre for Population Health Impact, University of Waterloo, 200 University Ave West, Waterloo, ON, N2L 3G1, Canada
| | - Cameron D Willis
- Movember Foundation, P.O. Box 60, East Melbourne, VIC, 8002, Australia.,Faculty of Health, Arts and Design, Swinburne University of Technology, John Street, Hawthorn, VIC, 3122, Australia
| | - Lisa Stockton
- Propel Centre for Population Health Impact, University of Waterloo, 200 University Ave West, Waterloo, ON, N2L 3G1, Canada
| | - Dana Zummach
- Propel Centre for Population Health Impact, University of Waterloo, 200 University Ave West, Waterloo, ON, N2L 3G1, Canada
| | - Jon Kerner
- Canadian Partnership Against Cancer, 145 King Street West Suite 900, Toronto, ON, M5H 1J8, Canada
| | - Kerry Robinson
- Public Health Agency of Canada, 130 Colonnade Road A.L. 6501H, Ottawa, ON, K1A 0K9, Canada
| | - Marie Chia
- Public Health Agency of Canada, 130 Colonnade Road A.L. 6501H, Ottawa, ON, K1A 0K9, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Yost J, Mackintosh J, Read K, Dobbins M. Promoting Awareness of Key Resources for Evidence-Informed Decision-making in Public Health: An Evaluation of a Webinar Series about Knowledge Translation Methods and Tools. Front Public Health 2016; 4:72. [PMID: 27148518 PMCID: PMC4840202 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2016.00072] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/02/2016] [Accepted: 04/04/2016] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
The National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools (NCCMT) has developed several resources to support evidence-informed decision-making - the process of distilling and disseminating best available evidence from research, context, and experience - and knowledge translation, applying best evidence in practice. One such resource, the Registry of Methods and Tools, is a free online database of 195 methods and tools to support knowledge translation. Building on the identification of webinars as a strategy to improve the dissemination of information, NCCMT launched the Spotlight on Knowledge Translation Methods and Tools webinar series in 2012 to promote awareness and use of the Registry. To inform continued implementation of this webinar series, NCCMT conducted an evaluation of the series' potential to improve awareness and use of the methods/tools within the Registry, as well as identify areas for improvement and "what worked." For this evaluation, the following data were analyzed: electronic follow-up surveys administered immediately following each webinar; an additional electronic survey administered 6 months after two webinars; and Google Analytics for each webinar. As of November 2015, there have been 22 webinars conducted, reaching 2048 people in multiple sectors across Canada and around the world. Evaluation results indicate that the webinars increase awareness about the Registry and stimulate use of the methods/tools. Although webinar attendees were significantly less likely to have used the methods/tools 6 months after webinars, this may be attributed to the lack of an identified opportunity in their work to use the method/tool. Despite technological challenges and requests for further examples of how the methods/tools have been used, there is overwhelming positive feedback that the format, presenters, content, and interaction across webinars "worked." This evaluation supports that webinars are a valuable strategy for increasing awareness and stimulating use of resources for evidence-informed decision-making and knowledge translation in public health practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer Yost
- Faculty of Health Sciences, School of Nursing, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Jeannie Mackintosh
- National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Kristin Read
- National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Maureen Dobbins
- National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Yost J, Ganann R, Thompson D, Aloweni F, Newman K, Hazzan A, McKibbon A, Dobbins M, Ciliska D. The effectiveness of knowledge translation interventions for promoting evidence-informed decision-making among nurses in tertiary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Implement Sci 2015; 10:98. [PMID: 26169063 PMCID: PMC4499897 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-015-0286-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 49] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/22/2014] [Accepted: 06/30/2015] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Nurses are increasingly expected to engage in evidence-informed decision-making (EIDM) to improve client and system outcomes. Despite an improved awareness about EIDM, there is a lack of use of research evidence and understanding about the effectiveness of interventions to promote EIDM. This project aimed to discover if knowledge translation (KT) interventions directed to nurses in tertiary care are effective for improving EIDM knowledge, skills, behaviours, and, as a result, client outcomes. It also sought to understand contextual factors that affect the impact of such interventions. METHODS A systematic review funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (PROSPERO registration: CRD42013003319) was conducted. Included studies examined the implementation of any KT intervention involving nurses in tertiary care to promote EIDM knowledge, skills, behaviours, and client outcomes or studies that examined contextual factors. Study designs included systematic reviews, quantitative, qualitative, and mixed method studies. The search included electronic databases and manual searching of published and unpublished literature to November 2012; key databases included MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and Excerpta Medica (EMBASE). Two reviewers independently performed study selection, risk of bias assessment, and data extraction. Studies with quantitative data determined to be clinically homogeneous were synthesized using meta-analytic methods. Studies with quantitative data not appropriate for meta-analysis were synthesized narratively by outcome. Studies with qualitative data were synthesized by theme. RESULTS Of the 44,648 citations screened, 30 citations met the inclusion criteria (18 quantitative, 10 qualitative, and 2 mixed methods studies). The quality of studies with quantitative data ranged from very low to high, and quality criteria was generally met for studies with qualitative data. No studies evaluated the impact on knowledge and skills; they primarily investigated the effectiveness of multifaceted KT strategies for promoting EIDM behaviours and improving client outcomes. Almost all studies included an educational component. A meta-analysis of two studies determined that a multifaceted intervention (educational meetings and use of a mentor) did not increase engagement in a range of EIDM behaviours [mean difference 2.7, 95 % CI (-1.7 to 7.1), I (2) = 0 %]. Among the remaining studies, no definitive conclusions could be made about the relative effectiveness of the KT interventions due to variation of interventions and outcomes, as well as study limitations. Findings from studies with qualitative data identified the organizational, individual, and interpersonal factors, as well as characteristics of the innovation, that influence the success of implementation. CONCLUSIONS KT interventions are being implemented and evaluated on nurses' behaviour and client outcomes. This systematic review may inform the selection of KT interventions and outcomes among nurses in tertiary care and decisions about further research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer Yost
- School of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
| | - Rebecca Ganann
- School of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
| | - David Thompson
- School of Nursing, Faculty of Health and Behavioural Sciences, Lakehead University, 955 Oliver Road, Thunder Bay, ON, Canada.
| | - Fazila Aloweni
- Singapore General Hospital, 31 Third Hospital Avenue, Singapore, Singapore.
| | - Kristine Newman
- Daphne Cockwell School of Nursing, Faculty of Community Services, Ryerson University, 350 Victoria Street, Toronto, ON, Canada.
| | - Afeez Hazzan
- Department of Medicine, McMaster University, St. Peter's Hospital-Hamilton Health Sciences, 88 Maplewood Avenue, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
| | - Ann McKibbon
- Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
| | - Maureen Dobbins
- School of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
| | - Donna Ciliska
- School of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Jack SM, Dobbins M, Sword W, Novotna G, Brooks S, Lipman EL, Niccols A. Evidence-informed decision-making by professionals working in addiction agencies serving women: a descriptive qualitative study. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy 2011; 6:29. [PMID: 22059528 PMCID: PMC3224771 DOI: 10.1186/1747-597x-6-29] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/09/2011] [Accepted: 11/07/2011] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Effective approaches to the prevention and treatment of substance abuse among mothers have been developed but not widely implemented. Implementation studies suggest that the adoption of evidence-based practices in the field of addictions remains low. There is a need, therefore, to better understand decision making processes in addiction agencies in order to develop more effective approaches to promote the translation of knowledge gained from addictions research into clinical practice. METHODS A descriptive qualitative study was conducted to explore: 1) the types and sources of evidence used to inform practice-related decisions within Canadian addiction agencies serving women; 2) how decision makers at different levels report using research evidence; and 3) factors that influence evidence-informed decision making. A purposeful sample of 26 decision-makers providing addiction treatment services to women completed in-depth qualitative interviews. Interview data were coded and analyzed using directed and summative content analysis strategies as well as constant comparison techniques. RESULTS Across all groups, individuals reported locating and using multiple types of evidence to inform decisions. Some decision-makers rely on their experiential knowledge of addiction and recovery in decision-making. Research evidence is often used directly in decision-making at program management and senior administrative levels. Information for decision-making is accessed from a range of sources, including web-based resources and experts in the field. Individual and organizational facilitators and barriers to using research evidence in decision making were identified. CONCLUSIONS There is support at administrative levels for integrating EIDM in addiction agencies. Knowledge transfer and exchange strategies should be focussed towards program managers and administrators and include capacity building for locating, appraising and using research evidence, knowledge brokering, and for partnering with universities. Resources are required to maintain web-based databases of searchable evidence to facilitate access to research evidence. A need exists to address the perception that there is a paucity of research evidence available to inform program decisions. Finally, there is a need to consider how experiential knowledge influences decision-making and what guidance research evidence has to offer regarding the implementation of different treatment approaches within the field of addictions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Susan M Jack
- School of Nursing, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
- Offord Centre for Child Studies, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Maureen Dobbins
- School of Nursing, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Wendy Sword
- School of Nursing, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Gabriela Novotna
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioural Neurosciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Sandy Brooks
- School of Nursing, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Ellen L Lipman
- Offord Centre for Child Studies, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioural Neurosciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Alison Niccols
- Offord Centre for Child Studies, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioural Neurosciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|