Dataset Information

Dissemination and stakeholder engagement practices among dissemination & implementation scientists: Results from an online survey.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

There has been an increasing focus on disseminating research findings, but less about practices specific to disseminating and engaging non-researchers. The present project sought to describe dissemination practices and engagement of stakeholders among dissemination & implementation (D&I) scientists.

Methods

Methods to disseminate to and engage non-research stakeholders were assessed using an online survey sent to a broad, diverse sample of D&I scientists.

Results

Surveys were received from 210 participants. The majority of respondents were from university or research settings in the United States. (69%) or Canada (13%), representing a mix of clinical (28%) and community settings (34%). 26% had received formal training in D&I. Respondents indicated routinely engaging in a variety of dissemination-related activities, with academic journal publications (88%), conference presentations (86%), and reports to funders (74%) being the most frequent. Journal publication was identified as the most impactful on respondents' careers (94%), but face-to-face meetings with stakeholders were rated as most impactful on practice or policy (40%). Stakeholder involvement in research was common, with clinical and community-based researchers engaging stakeholder groups in broadly similar ways, but with critical differences noted between researchers with greater seniority, those with more D&I training, those based in the United States vs. Canada, and those in community vs. clinical research settings.

Conclusions

There have been increases in stakeholder engagement, but few other practices since the 2012 survey, and some differences across subgroups. Methods to engage different stakeholders deserve more in-depth investigation. D&I researchers report substantial misalignment of incentives and behaviors related to dissemination to non-research audiences.

SUBMITTER: Knoepke CE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6853327 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Dissemination and stakeholder engagement practices among dissemination & implementation scientists: Results from an online survey.

Knoepke Christopher E CE Ingle M Pilar MP Matlock Daniel D DD Brownson Ross C RC Glasgow Russell E RE

PloS one 20191113 11

<h4>Introduction</h4>There has been an increasing focus on disseminating research findings, but less about practices specific to disseminating and engaging non-researchers. The present project sought to describe dissemination practices and engagement of stakeholders among dissemination & implementation (D&I) scientists.<h4>Methods</h4>Methods to disseminate to and engage non-research stakeholders were assessed using an online survey sent to a broad, diverse sample of D&I scientists.<h4>Results</ ...[more]

PMID: 31721784

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundA significant gap persists between evidence from research and its use in practice. Research funders, important actors in the health research system, can help reduce this gap by initiating dissemination and implementation (D&I) activities. The specific types of D&I activities funders currently lead have not been explored thoroughly. The Ensuring Value in Research (EViR) Funders' Forum-an international collaboration of health-related research funders-was established in 2017 to address research waste issues and increase the value of research. The Forum surveyed funders to learn about their D&I practices and challenges.MethodsWe distributed a five-item exploratory survey to participating funders in August 2018. The results informed the development of a survey instrument, distributed in June 2019. The survey instrument contained 15 items prompting respondents to categorize and describe their level of effort in six practice areas: release of findings, dissemination, knowledge exchange/partnering, implementation, building capacity, and implementation research. In addition, funders were asked to describe examples of their practices in detail. Thirty-one funders completed the survey instrument, a 58% response rate.ResultsMost funders regard D&I as a high priority, but funders vary in levels of activity per practice area. Over half of respondents reported that they have at least some activity in all D&I practice areas surveyed, with the exception of implementation research. The vast majority indicated some or significant activity in release of findings (97%) and dissemination (87%). Nearly one-fifth of funders (19%) indicated that implementation is outside their remit, and 26% indicated that implementation research is outside their remit. Survey respondents shared a broad range of examples of activities in each practice area. Lack of evidence for successful approaches and measuring impact were named frequently as challenges and as potential areas for collaboration.ConclusionsAlthough models of dissemination and implementation vary across organizations, the majority of funders indicated that D&I of research findings is a priority. Funders indicated a need for evidence on effectiveness of various approaches to D&I. Increased collaboration between funders, including sharing good practices, will increase our collective learning and knowledge development.

Project description:Translational approaches to science have the potential to produce research that better meets the needs of community stakeholders and advances scientific understanding. Researchers involved in translational research make committed efforts to increased engagement and communication with stakeholders throughout the research process, from planning through implementation and evaluation. Referred to as solutions-driven research within the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Research Development, this approach is being piloted on Cape Cod (Barnstable County), Massachusetts. EPA researchers are working in close coordination with community partners on the Cape to better understand and address challenges with managing nonpoint source nitrogen. The pilot also aims to assess the usefulness of solutions-driven research approaches for application in future EPA research efforts. Using semi-structured interviews with researchers and other stakeholders, we examined researchers' and stakeholders' perspectives on the impacts of intentional and intensive stakeholder engagement on research efforts to improve coastal water quality. This study provides a reflexive assessment of the perceived benefits and drawbacks for researchers and other stakeholders when there is an institutional expectation of an increased focus on engagement. We found that engagement has been truly intertwined with research in the pilot, participants perceived an improvement in research usefulness through developing valuable collaborative relationships, and that these relationships required significant time commitments to maintain. We also identified a need for an efficient infrastructure for developing and distributing communication materials for continued engagement with diverse stakeholders throughout the research process. The paper provides transferable practices for researchers seeking to use a solutions-driven research approach based on lessons learned thus far in how to support researchers and research planning in simultaneously prioritizing effective engagement and sound collaborative environmental science research to address a localized environmental challenge. This is an innovative approach in that interviews occurred as the implementation phase of the project began, with the goal of implementing the lessons learned outlined here in the ongoing project.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s42532-022-00119-5.

Project description:ObjectiveThis evaluation captures the perspectives of multiple stakeholders within a salaried dental care delivery organization (dentists, dental assistants, dental hygienists, and dental management) on the implementation of a pit-and-fissure sealant guideline in the Kaiser Permanente Dental Program. Also assessed is the role of formal processes and structures in providing a framework for guideline implementation.MethodsWe collected qualitative data through field observations, stakeholder interviews (n = 6), and focus groups (30 participants in 5 focus groups). Field observation notes captured summaries of conversations and other activities. Interviews and focus groups were recorded and transcribed. We analyzed transcripts and field notes using a template analysis with NVivo 12 software to identify themes related to the existing implementation process of clinical guidelines and stakeholder perspectives on the strengths and weaknesses of this process.ResultsStakeholders perceived 2 main barriers for achieving implementation of the pit-and-fissure sealant guideline: 1) shortcomings in the implementation infrastructure resulting in lack of clarity about the roles and responsibilities in the guideline implementation process and lack of effective mechanisms to disseminate guideline content and 2) resource constraints, such as limited human, space, and material resources. Perceived opportunities for the dissemination and implementation of guidelines included recognition of the importance of guidelines in dental practice and well-functioning workflows within dental specialties.ConclusionOur research points to the importance of developing and maintaining an infrastructure to ensure standardized, predictable mechanisms for implementation of guidelines and thereby promoting practice change. While addressing resource constraints may not be possible in all circumstances, an important step for improving guideline implementation-wherever feasible-would be the development of a robust implementation infrastructure that captures and delineates roles and responsibilities of different clinical actors in the guideline implementation process.Knowledge transfer statementThe results of this study can be used by health care leadership and administrators to understand possible reasons for a lack of guideline implementation and provide suggestions for establishing sustainable infrastructure to promote the adoption of clinical guidelines in salaried dental clinics.

Dataset Information

Dissemination and stakeholder engagement practices among dissemination & implementation scientists: Results from an online survey.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Dissemination and stakeholder engagement practices among dissemination & implementation scientists: Results from an online survey.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets