A Framework for the Dissemination and Utilization of Research for Health-Care Policy and Practice

Development of the Guide to Disseminating Research (GuiDiR): A consolidated framework

BACKGROUND

Less than one third of research evidence is translated into policy or practice. Knowledge translation requires effective dissemination, adoption and finally implementation. These three stages are equally important, however, existing knowledge translation models and frameworks provide little and disparate information about the steps and activities required for effective dissemination.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to empirically develop a consolidated framework of evidence-based steps and activities for disseminating research evidence.

METHODS

We identified models and frameworks from a scoping review and dissemination and implementation webtool. We synthesised them into a prototype dissemination framework. Models and frameworks were eligible to inform steps in our framework if they fulfilled at least one of three elements of dissemination: intending to generate awareness of a message, incorporates targeting an audience: tailoring communication. An initial coding framework was created to organise data into dissemination steps. Drawing on 'co-approach' principles, authors of the included models and frameworks (dissemination experts) and health service researchers (end users) were invited to test and refine the prototype framework at a workshop.

RESULTS

From 48 models and frameworks reviewed, only 32 fulfilled one or more of the three dissemination elements. The initial coding framework, upon refinement, yielded the Guide to Disseminating Research (GuiDiR) comprising five steps. 1) Identify target audiences and dissemination partners. 2) Engage with dissemination partners. 3) Identify barriers and enablers to dissemination. 4) Create dissemination messages. 5) Disseminate and evaluate. Multiple activities were identified for each step and no single model or framework represents all steps and activities in GuiDiR.

CONCLUSIONS

GuiDiR unifies dissemination components from knowledge translation models and frameworks and harmonises language into a format accessible to non-experts. It outlines for researchers, funders and practitioners the expected structure of dissemination and details the activities for executing an evidence-based dissemination strategy.

Enhancing Impact: A Call to Action for Equitable Implementation Science

Despite investments in evidence-based interventions and Implementation Science, most evidence-based interventions are not widely or routinely adopted, delivered, or sustained in many real-world community and healthcare settings. This gap is even greater in settings and populations experiencing numerous social and structural barriers to health, with important implications for persistent patterns in health inequities. In this Viewpoint, as part of a Special Issue on Advancing the Adaptability of Chronic Disease Prevention and Management through Implementation Science, we outline seven calls to action for the field of Implementation Science, with the goal of encouraging researchers, practitioners, and funders to be more intentional and accountable in applying Implementation Science to have greater impact on promoting health equity. Calls to action include (1) enhance public health, community, and multi-sectoral partnerships to promote health equity and equitable implementation; (2) revisit and build the evidence base needed to promote health equity and impact at multiple levels; (3) prioritize focus on policy development, dissemination, and implementation; (4) be agile and responsive in application of Implementation Science frameworks, processes, and methods; (5) identify and redefine meaningful metrics for equity and impact; (6) disseminate scientific evidence and research to a diverse range of partners and potential beneficiaries; and (7) extend focus on de-implementation, mis-implementation, and sustainability which are central to enhancing health equity. Additionally, we outline why a focus on prevention and public health is essential to making progress towards health equity in Implementation Science, summarize important advancements that the field has made towards making equity more foundational, and pose important research questions to enhance equitable impact of work in this area.

From bench to policy: a critical analysis of models for evidence-informed policymaking in healthcare

Background

The use of research evidence in policy making is a complex and challenging process that has a long history in various fields, especially in healthcare. Different terms and concepts have been used to describe the relationship between research and policy, but they often lack clarity and consensus. To address this gap, several strategies and models have been proposed to facilitate evidence informed policy making and to identify the key factors and mechanisms involved. This study aims to critically review the existing models of evidence informed policy making (EIPM) in healthcare and to assess their strengths and limitations.

Method

A systematic search and review conducted to identify and critically assess EIPM models in healthcare. We searched PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus databases as major electronic databases and applied predefined inclusion criteria to select the models. We also checked the citations of the included models to find other scholars' perspectives. Each model was described and critiqued each model in detail and discussed their features and limitations.

Result

Nine models of EIPM in healthcare were identified. While models had some strengths in comprehension, flexibility and theoretical foundations, analysis also identified limitations including: presupposing rational policymaking; lacking alternatives for time-sensitive situations; not capturing policy complexity; neglecting unintended effects; limited context considerations; inadequate complexity concepts; limited collaboration guidance; and unspecified evidence adaptations.

Conclusion

The reviewed models provide useful frameworks for EIPM but need further improvement to address their limitations. Concepts from sociology of knowledge, change theory and complexity science can enrich the models. Future EIPM models should better account for the complexity of research-policy relationships and provide tailored strategies based on the policy context.

A scoping review of theories, models and frameworks used or proposed to evaluate knowledge mobilization strategies

BACKGROUND

Evaluating knowledge mobilization strategies (KMb) presents challenges for organizations seeking to understand their impact to improve KMb effectiveness. Moreover, the large number of theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs) available can be confusing for users. Therefore, the purpose of this scoping review was to identify and describe the characteristics of TMFs that have been used or proposed in the literature to evaluate KMb strategies.

METHODS

A scoping review methodology was used. Articles were identified through searches in electronic databases, previous reviews and reference lists of included articles. Titles, abstracts and full texts were screened in duplicate. Data were charted using a piloted data charting form. Data extracted included study characteristics, KMb characteristics, and TMFs used or proposed for KMb evaluation. An adapted version of Nilsen (Implement Sci 10:53, 2015) taxonomy and the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) taxonomy (Powell et al. in Implement Sci 10:21, 2015) guided data synthesis.

RESULTS

Of the 4763 search results, 505 were retrieved, and 88 articles were eligible for review. These consisted of 40 theoretical articles (45.5%), 44 empirical studies (50.0%) and four protocols (4.5%). The majority were published after 2010 (n = 70, 79.5%) and were health related (n = 71, 80.7%). Half of the studied KMb strategies were implemented in only four countries: Canada, Australia, the United States and the United Kingdom (n = 42, 47.7%). One-third used existing TMFs (n = 28, 31.8%). According to the adapted Nilsen taxonomy, process models (n = 34, 38.6%) and evaluation frameworks (n = 28, 31.8%) were the two most frequent types of TMFs used or proposed to evaluate KMb. According to the ERIC taxonomy, activities to "train and educate stakeholders" (n = 46, 52.3%) were the most common, followed by activities to "develop stakeholder interrelationships" (n = 23, 26.1%). Analysis of the TMFs identified revealed relevant factors of interest for the evaluation of KMb strategies, classified into four dimensions: context, process, effects and impacts.

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review provides an overview of the many KMb TMFs used or proposed. The results provide insight into potential dimensions and components to be considered when assessing KMb strategies.

Assessing the Integrative Framework for the Implementation of Change in Nursing Practice: Comparative Case Studies in French Hospitals

The implementation of healthcare policies in healthcare organizations is a pivotal issue for managers. They generally require a change in professional practices. In previous work, we developed the Integrative Framework for Implementation of change in Nursing Practices (IFINP) to support implementation initiatives for such change in nursing practices. We aimed to assess the generalizability of IFINP in other organizational settings and explore links between strategic and socio-material factors during implementation. We used a comparative qualitative case study at three French hospitals to assess the implementation of certification procedures. Data were collected from 33 semi-structured interviews with managers and nurses. Narratives reflecting actions and interactions were extracted and deductively analyzed using IFINP components. The results showed that the framework was flexible and captured the different aspects of implementation actions and interactions at the three hospitals. Strong interferences were identified between mobilization mechanisms and strategic elements. Interferences were observed mostly between ‘reflexive monitoring and work articulation’, and ‘reflexive monitoring and sense-making’ mechanisms. Leadership was integrated into the different mechanisms, especially the ‘translation’ mechanism. The IFINP facilitated a greater understanding of strategic elements and associated relationships with social and material factors during implementation. It helps to provide a clear definition of the managers’ role when implementing new nurse practices.

Knowledge implementation in health care management: a qualitative study

Background

The gap between knowledge and practice is a global issue, which increases wasteful spending in healthcare. There are several models and frameworks to address this gap and try to solve the challenge. Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) framework highlights the interaction of three main elements: evidence, context and facilitation, to implement research into practice, successfully. This framework can use as a tool to evaluate the situation and guide the changing. This study conducted to explain the status of knowledge implementation in Iran’s healthcare management system.

Methods

This qualitative study was done by using a directive content analysis approach through conducting in-depth, structured interviews with 15 health managers based on the PARIHS framework. Guiding questions were based on the three main elements of the framework: evidence, context and facilitation. The content of the interviews entered into the Qualitative Data Analysis software (MAXQDA version 10) and, then, analyzed.

Results

The most common source of evidence used by managers for decision-making was local information and previous experience. Evaluation more emphasized compared to other sub-elements of context, i.e. culture and leadership. In terms of facilitation, performing tasks by others was the dominant opinion.

Conclusion

Our results showed that managers in the healthcare system of Iran use their own and other manager’s experience and the local information for decision-making and have no ideas about facilitation.

Catching the Wave: Are Biology Graduate Students on Board with Evidence-Based Teaching?

Graduate students hold a critical role in responding to national calls for increased adoption of evidence-based teaching (EBT) in undergraduate classrooms, as they not only serve as teaching assistants, but also represent the pool from which future faculty will emerge. Through interviews with 32 biology graduate students from 25 institutions nationwide, we sought to understand the progress these graduate students are making in adopting EBT through qualitative exploration of their perceptions of and experiences with both EBT and instructional professional development. Initial inductive content analysis of interview transcripts guided the holistic placement of participants within stages of Rogers's diffusions of innovations model, which we use as a theoretical framework to describe the progress of EBT adoption. We found that most graduate students in our sample are aware of and value EBT, but only 37.5% have implemented EBT. Many who were progressing toward EBT adoption had sought out supplementary instructional experiences beyond the requirements of their programs, and 72% perceived an institutional lack of support for teaching-related professional development opportunities. These data indicate that, while many graduate students are already engaged with the movement to adopt EBT, graduate training programs should emphasize increasing access to quality training in EBT strategies.

The RANI Project: A socio-normative intervention to reduce anemia in Odisha, India: A formative research protocol

Background: More than half of women of reproductive age in India are anemic. Anemia is associated with increased risk of preterm delivery, higher maternal mortality and contributes to fatigue, which affects women’s work productivity. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends daily oral iron and folic acid (IFA) supplements during pregnancy and weekly supplements for women of reproductive age. Government programs and global donors have distributed and promoted IFA supplements in India for over four decades. However, initial intake and compliance remain inadequate.

Objectives: This protocol describes the formative research phase of a larger study, called the Reduction in Anemia through Normative Innovations (RANI) Project, which will test, through a randomized controlled trial, the hypothesis that a social norms-based behavioral intervention in Odisha, India will improve uptake of IFA supplements and reduce anemia among reproductive age women as compared to usual care. The focus of this paper is on the formative research required to develop a sound intervention. We will examine socio-normative barriers to and facilitators of IFA supplement uptake.

Methods and analysis: Based on the Theory of Normative Social Behavior, we will adopt a mixed-method, multilevel approach. We will collect data using focus groups, in-depth interviews, observations, Rapid Participatory Ethnographic Evaluation and Research (PEER) techniques, and perceptual mapping methods. Our sample includes reproductive age women (pregnant and not pregnant), their husbands, their mothers/in law and key stakeholders. Before collecting the data, and after analyzing the results, we will hold convenings in India to engage key stakeholders in collaborative design. Following the intervention design, we will test components of the intervention, gather user feedback and fine-tune as necessary.

Impact: This study will contribute to the social norms and behavioral intervention research and inform policymakers about the value of adopting a socio-normative approach.

Designing a socio-normative intervention to reduce anemia in Odisha India: A formative research protocol

Background: More than half of women of reproductive age in India are anemic. Anemia is associated with increased risk of preterm delivery, higher maternal mortality and contributes to fatigue, which affects women’s work productivity. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends daily oral iron and folic acid (IFA) supplements during pregnancy and weekly supplements for women of reproductive age. Government programs and global donors have distributed and promoted IFA supplements in India for over four decades. However, initial intake and compliance remain inadequate. Objectives: This protocol describes the formative research phase of a larger study, which will test, through a randomized controlled trial, the hypothesis that a social norms-based behavioral intervention in Odisha, India will improve uptake of IFA supplements and reduce anemia among reproductive age women as compared to usual care. The focus of this paper is on the formative research required to develop a sound intervention. We will examine socio-normative barriers to and facilitators of IFA supplement uptake. Methods and analysis: Based on the Theory of Normative Social Behavior, we will adopt a mixed-method, multilevel approach. We will collect data using focus groups, in-depth interviews, observations, Rapid Participatory Ethnographic Evaluation and Research (PEER) techniques, and perceptual mapping methods. Our sample includes reproductive age women (pregnant and not pregnant), their husbands, their mothers/in law and key stakeholders. After analyzing the results, we will hold a convening in India to collaboratively design the intervention. Following the intervention design, we will test components of the intervention, gather user feedback and tweak as necessary. Additionally, to improve adoption and sustainability of the intervention, we will conduct policy dialogue with stakeholders throughout the formative research. Impact: This study will contribute to the social norms and behavioral intervention research and inform policymakers about the value of adopting a socio-normative approach.

A Clinical Librarian-Nursing Partnership to Bridge Clinical Practice and Research in an Oncology Setting

Nurses in clinical settings in which evidence-based, individualized care is expected are often the best resource to identify important clinical questions and gaps in practice. These nurses are frequently challenged by a lack of resources to fully develop their questions and identify the most appropriate methods to answer them. A strategic and ongoing partnership between medical library services and nursing can support nurses as they embark on the process of answering these questions and, ultimately, improving patient care and clinical outcomes

Assessing citation networks for dissemination and implementation research frameworks

BACKGROUND

A recent review of frameworks used in dissemination and implementation (D&I) science described 61 judged to be related either to dissemination, implementation, or both. The current use of these frameworks and their contributions to D&I science more broadly has yet to be reviewed. For these reasons, our objective was to determine the role of these frameworks in the development of D&I science.

METHODS

We used the Web of Science™ Core Collection and Google Scholar™ to conduct a citation network analysis for the key frameworks described in a recent systematic review of D&I frameworks (Am J Prev Med 43(3):337-350, 2012). From January to August 2016, we collected framework data including title, reference, publication year, and citations per year and conducted descriptive and main path network analyses to identify those most important in holding the current citation network for D&I frameworks together.

RESULTS

The source article contained 119 cited references, with 50 published articles and 11 documents identified as a primary framework reference. The average citations per year for the 61 frameworks reviewed ranged from 0.7 to 103.3 among articles published from 1985 to 2012. Citation rates from all frameworks are reported with citation network analyses for the framework review article and ten highly cited framework seed articles. The main path for the D&I framework citation network is presented.

CONCLUSIONS

We examined citation rates and the main paths through the citation network to delineate the current landscape of D&I framework research, and opportunities for advancing framework development and use. Dissemination and implementation researchers and practitioners may consider frequency of framework citation and our network findings when planning implementation efforts to build upon this foundation and promote systematic advances in D&I science.

A review of policy dissemination and implementation research funded by the National Institutes of Health, 2007-2014

BACKGROUND

Policy has a tremendous potential to improve population health when informed by research evidence. Such evidence, however, typically plays a suboptimal role in policymaking processes. The field of policy dissemination and implementation research (policy D&I) exists to address this challenge. The purpose of this study was to: (1) determine the extent to which policy D&I was funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), (2) identify trends in NIH-funded policy D&I, and (3) describe characteristics of NIH-funded policy D&I projects.

METHODS

The NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tool was used to identify all projects funded through D&I-focused funding announcements. We screened for policy D&I projects by searching project title, abstract, and term fields for mentions of "policy," "policies," "law," "legal," "legislation," "ordinance," "statute," "regulation," "regulatory," "code," or "rule." A project was classified as policy D&I if it explicitly proposed to conduct research about the content of a policy, the process through which it was developed, or outcomes it produced. A coding guide was iteratively developed, and all projects were independently coded by two researchers. ClinicalTrials.gov and PubMed were used to obtain additional project information and validate coding decisions. Descriptive statistics--stratified by funding mechanism, Institute, and project characteristics--were produced.

RESULTS

Between 2007 and 2014, 146 projects were funded through the D&I funding announcements, 12 (8.2 %) of which were policy D&I. Policy D&I funding totaled $16,177,250, equivalent to 10.5 % of all funding through the D&I funding announcements. The proportion of funding for policy D&I projects ranged from 14.6 % in 2007 to 8.0 % in 2012. Policy D&I projects were primarily focused on policy outcomes (66.7 %), implementation (41.7 %), state-level policies (41.7 %), and policies within the USA (83.3 %). Tobacco (33.3 %) and cancer (25.0 %) control were the primary topics of focus. Many projects combined survey (58.3 %) and interview (33.3 %) methods with analysis of archival data sources.

CONCLUSIONS

NIH has made an initial investment in policy D&I research, but the level of support has varied between Institutes. Policy D&I researchers have utilized a variety of designs, methods, and data sources to investigate the development processes, content, and outcomes of public and private policies.

Hiding in plain sight: communication theory in implementation science

Background

Poor communication among healthcare professionals is a pressing problem, contributing to widespread barriers to patient safety. The word “communication” means to share or make common. In the literature, two communication paradigms dominate: (1) communication as a transactional process responsible for information exchange, and (2) communication as a transformational process responsible for causing change. Implementation science has focused on information exchange attributes while largely ignoring transformational attributes of communication. In this paper, we debate the merits of encompassing both paradigms.

Discussion

We conducted a two-staged literature review searching for the concept of communication in implementation science to understand how communication is conceptualized. Twenty-seven theories, models, or frameworks were identified; only Rogers’ Diffusion of Innovations theory provides a definition of communication and includes both communication paradigms. Most models (notable exceptions include Diffusion of Innovations, The Ottawa Model of Research Use, and Normalization Process Theory) describe communication as a transactional process. But thinking of communication solely as information transfer or exchange misrepresents reality. We recommend that implementation science theories (1) propose and test the concept of shared understanding when describing communication, (2) acknowledge that communication is multi-layered, identify at least a few layers, and posit how identified layers might affect the development of shared understanding, (3) acknowledge that communication occurs in a social context, providing a frame of reference for both individuals and groups, (4) acknowledge the unpredictability of communication (and healthcare processes in general), and (5) engage with and draw on work done by communication theorists.

Summary

Implementation science literature has conceptualized communication as a transactional process (when communication has been mentioned at all), thereby ignoring a key contributor to implementation intervention success. When conceptualized as a transformational process, the focus of communication moves to shared understanding and is grounded in human interactions and the way we go about constructing knowledge. Instead of hiding in plain sight, we suggest explicitly acknowledging the role that communication plays in our implementation efforts. By using both paradigms, we can investigate when communication facilitates implementation, when it does not, and how to improve it so that our implementation and clinical interventions are embraced by clinicians and patients alike.

Dissemination of performance information and continuous improvement: A narrative systematic review

PURPOSE

Developing a performance measure and reporting the results to support decision making at an individual level has yielded poor results in many health systems. The purpose of this paper is to highlight the factors associated with the dissemination of performance information that generate and support continuous improvement in health organizations.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

A systematic data collection strategy that includes empirical and theoretical research published from 1980 to 2010, both qualitative and quantitative, was performed on Web of Science, Current Contents, EMBASE and MEDLINE. A narrative synthesis method was used to iteratively detail explicative processes that underlie the intervention. A classification and synthesis framework was developed, drawing on knowledge transfer and exchange (KTE) literature. The sample consisted of 114 articles, including seven systematic or exhaustive reviews.

FINDINGS

Results showed that dissemination in itself is not enough to produce improvement initiatives. Successful dissemination depends on various factors, which influence the way collective actors react to performance information such as the clarity of objectives, the relationships between stakeholders, the system's governance and the available incentives.

RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS

This review was limited to the process of knowledge dissemination in health systems and its utilization by users at the health organization level. Issues related to improvement initiatives deserve more attention.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Knowledge dissemination goes beyond better communication and should be considered as carefully as the measurement of performance. Choices pertaining to intervention should be continuously prompted by the concern to support organizational action.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

While considerable attention was paid to the public reporting of performance information, this review sheds some light on a more promising avenue for changes and improvements, notably in public health systems.

The Hidden Complexity of Long-Term Care: how context mediates knowledge translation and use of best practices

PURPOSE

Context is increasingly recognized as a key factor to be considered when addressing healthcare practice. This study describes features of context as they pertain to knowledge use in long-term care (LTC).

DESIGN AND METHODS

As one component of the research program Translating Research in Elder Care, an in-depth qualitative case study was conducted to examine the research question "How does organizational context mediate the use of knowledge in practice in long-term care facilities?" A representative facility was chosen from the province of Saskatchewan, Canada. Data included document review, direct observation of daily care practices, and interviews with direct care, allied provider, and administrative staff.

RESULTS

The Hidden Complexity of Long-Term Care model consists of 8 categories that enmesh to create a context within which knowledge exchange and best practice are executed. These categories range from the most easily identifiable to the least observable: physical environment, resources, ambiguity, flux, relationships, and philosophies. Two categories (experience and confidence, leadership and mentoring) mediate the impact of other contextual factors. Inappropriate physical environments, inadequate resources, ambiguous situations, continual change, multiple relationships, and contradictory philosophies make for a complicated context that impacts care provision.

IMPLICATIONS

A hidden complexity underlays healthcare practices in LTC and each care provider must negotiate this complexity when providing care. Attending to this complexity in which care decisions are made will lead to improvements in knowledge exchange mechanisms and best practice uptake in LTC settings.

A measurement instrument for spread of quality improvement in healthcare

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to develop and test a measurement instrument for spread of quality improvement in healthcare. The instrument distinguishes: (i) spread of work practices and their results and (ii) spread practices and effectiveness. Relations between spread and sustainability of changed work practices were also explored to assess convergent validity.

DESIGN

We developed and tested a measurement instrument for spread in a follow-up study. The instrument consisted of 18-items with four subscales.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

The sample consisted of former improvement teams in a quality improvement program for long-term care (nteams = 73, nrespondents = 127). Data were collected in a questionnaire about 1 year post-pilot site improvement implementation.

INTERVENTIONS

Quality improvements in long-term care practices.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Four variables were construed: (i) actions for spread of work practices, (ii) actions for spread of results, (iii) effectiveness of spread of work practices and (iv) effectiveness of spread of results.

RESULTS

Psychometric analysis yielded positive results on the item level. The intended four-factor model yielded satisfactory fit. The internal consistency of each scale was fine (Cronbach's α 0.70-0.93). Bivariate correlations revealed that the spread variables were strongly related but distinct, and positively related to the sustainability variables.

CONCLUSIONS

The psychometric properties are in line with methodological standards. Convergent validity was confirmed with sustainability. The measurement instrument offers a good starting point for the analysis of spread.

An evaluability assessment of a West Africa based Non-Governmental Organization's (NGO) progressive evaluation strategy

While program evaluations are increasingly valued by international organizations to inform practices and public policies, actual evaluation use (EU) in such contexts is inconsistent. Moreover, empirical literature on EU in the context of humanitarian Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) is very limited. The current article focuses on the evaluability assessment (EA) of a West-Africa based humanitarian NGO's progressive evaluation strategy. Since 2007, the NGO has established an evaluation strategy to inform its maternal and child health care user-fee exemption intervention. Using Wholey's (2004) framework, the current EA enabled us to clarify with the NGO's evaluation partners the intent of their evaluation strategy and to design its program logic model. The EA ascertained the plausibility of the evaluation strategy's objectives, the accessibility of relevant data, and the utility for intended users of evaluating both the evaluation strategy and the conditions that foster EU. Hence, key evaluability conditions for an EU study were assured. This article provides an example of EA procedures when such guidance is scant in the literature. It also offers an opportunity to analyze critically the use of EAs in the context of a humanitarian NGO's collaboration with evaluators and political actors.

Knowledge exchange in the Pacific: The TROPIC (Translational Research into Obesity Prevention Policies for Communities) project

BACKGROUND

Policies targeting obesogenic environments and behaviours are critical to counter rising obesity rates and lifestyle-related non-communicable diseases (NCDs). Policies are likely to be most effective and enduring when they are based on the best available evidence. Evidence-informed policy making is especially challenging in countries with limited resources. The Pacific TROPIC (Translational Research for Obesity Prevention in Communities) project aims to implement and evaluate a tailored knowledge-brokering approach to evidence-informed policy making to address obesity in Fiji, a Pacific nation challenged by increasingly high rates of obesity and concomitant NCDs.

METHODS

The TROPIC project draws on the concept of 'knowledge exchange' between policy developers (individuals; organisations) and researchers to deliver a knowledge broking programme that maps policy environments, conducts workshops on evidence-informed policy making, supports the development of evidence-informed policy briefs, and embeds evidence-informed policy making into organisational culture. Recruitment of government and nongovernment organisational representatives will be based on potential to: develop policies relevant to obesity, reach broad audiences, and commit to resourcing staff and building a culture that supports evidence-informed policy development. Workshops will increase awareness of both obesity and policy cycles, as well as develop participants' skills in accessing, assessing and applying relevant evidence to policy briefs. The knowledge-broking team will then support participants to: 1) develop evidence-informed policy briefs that are both commensurate with national and organisational plans and also informed by evidence from the Pacific Obesity Prevention in Communities project and elsewhere; and 2) collaborate with participating organisations to embed evidence-informed policy making structures and processes. This knowledge broking initiative will be evaluated via data from semi-structured interviews, a validated self-assessment tool, process diaries and outputs.

DISCUSSION

Public health interventions have rarely targeted evidence-informed policy making structures and processes to reduce obesity and NCDs. This study will empirically advance understanding of knowledge broking processes to extend evidence-informed policy making skills and develop a suite of national obesity-related policies that can potentially improve population health outcomes.

Understanding the role of communities of practice in evidence-informed decision making in public health

In this article we report on qualitative findings that describe public health practitioners' practice-based definitions of evidence-informed decision making (EIDM) and communities of practice (CoP), and how CoP could be a mechanism to enhance their capacity to practice EIDM. Our findings emerged from a qualitative descriptive analysis of group discussions and participant concept maps from two consensus-building workshops that were conducted with public health practitioners (N = 90) in two provinces in eastern Canada. Participants recognized the importance of EIDM and the significance of integrating explicit and tacit evidence in the EIDM process, which was enhanced by CoP. Tacit knowledge, particularly from peers and personal experience, was the preferred source of knowledge, with informal peer interactions being the favored form of CoP to support EIDM. CoP helped practitioners build relationships and community capacity, share and create knowledge, and build professional confidence and critical inquiry. Participants described individual and organizational attributes that were needed to enable CoP and EIDM.

A survey tool for measuring evidence-based decision making capacity in public health agencies

BACKGROUND

While increasing attention is placed on using evidence-based decision making (EBDM) to improve public health, there is little research assessing the current EBDM capacity of the public health workforce. Public health agencies serve a wide range of populations with varying levels of resources. Our survey tool allows an individual agency to collect data that reflects its unique workforce.

METHODS

Health department leaders and academic researchers collaboratively developed and conducted cross-sectional surveys in Kansas and Mississippi (USA) to assess EBDM capacity. Surveys were delivered to state- and local-level practitioners and community partners working in chronic disease control and prevention. The core component of the surveys was adopted from a previously tested instrument and measured gaps (importance versus availability) in competencies for EBDM in chronic disease. Other survey questions addressed expectations and incentives for using EBDM, self-efficacy in three EBDM skills, and estimates of EBDM within the agency.

RESULTS

In both states, participants identified communication with policymakers, use of economic evaluation, and translation of research to practice as top competency gaps. Self-efficacy in developing evidence-based chronic disease control programs was lower than in finding or using data. Public health practitioners estimated that approximately two-thirds of programs in their agency were evidence-based. Mississippi participants indicated that health department leaders' expectations for the use of EBDM was approximately twice that of co-workers' expectations and that the use of EBDM could be increased with training and leadership prioritization.

CONCLUSIONS

The assessment of EBDM capacity in Kansas and Mississippi built upon previous nationwide findings to identify top gaps in core competencies for EBDM in chronic disease and to estimate a percentage of programs in U.S. health departments that are evidence-based. The survey can serve as a valuable tool for other health departments and non-governmental organizations to assess EBDM capacity within their own workforce and to assist in the identification of approaches that will enhance the uptake of EBDM processes in public health programming and policymaking. Localized survey findings can provide direction for focusing workforce training programs and can indicate the types of incentives and policies that could affect the culture of EBDM in the workplace.

Knowledge-to-action processes in SHRTN collaborative communities of practice: a study protocol

Background

The Seniors Health Research Transfer Network (SHRTN) Collaborative is a network of networks that work together to improve the health and health care of Ontario seniors. The collaborative facilitates knowledge exchange through a library service, knowledge brokers (KBs), local implementation teams, collaborative technology, and, most importantly, Communities of Practice (CoPs) whose members work together to identify innovations, translate evidence, and help implement changes.

This project aims to increase our understanding of knowledge-to-action (KTA) processes mobilized through SHRTN CoPs that are working to improve the health of Ontario seniors. For this research, KTA refers to the movement of research and experience-based knowledge between social contexts, and the use of that knowledge to improve practice. We will examine the KTA processes themselves, as well as the role of human agents within those processes. The conceptual framework we have adopted to inform our research is the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) framework.

Methods/design

This study will use a multiple case study design (minimum of nine cases over three years) to investigate how SHRTN CoPs work and pursue knowledge exchange in different situations. Each case will yield a unique narrative, framed around the three PARIHS dimensions: evidence, context, and facilitation. Together, the cases will shed light on how SHRTN CoPs approach their knowledge exchange initiatives, and how they respond to challenges and achieve their objectives. Data will be collected using interviews, document analysis, and ethnographic observation.

Discussion

This research will generate new knowledge about the defining characteristics of CoPs operating in the health system, on leadership roles in CoPs, and on the nature of interaction processes, relationships, and knowledge exchange mechanisms. Our work will yield a better understanding of the factors that contribute to the success or failure of KTA initiatives, and create a better understanding of how local caregiving contexts interact with specific initiatives. Our participatory design will allow stakeholders to influence the practical usefulness of our findings and contribute to improved health services delivery for seniors.