Dataset Information

Building an integrated knowledge translation (IKT) evidence base: colloquium proceedings and research direction.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Integrated knowledge translation (IKT) is a model of research co-production, whereby researchers partner with knowledge users throughout the research process and who can use the research recommendations in practice or policy. IKT approaches are used to improve the relevance and impact of research. As an emerging field, however, the evidence underpinning IKT is in active development. The Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network represents a collaborative interdisciplinary team that aims to advance the state of IKT science. METHODS:In 2017, the Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network issued a call to its members for concept papers to further define IKT, outline an IKT research agenda, and inform the Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network's special meeting entitled, Integrated Knowledge Translation State of the Science Colloquium, in Ottawa, Canada (2018). At the colloquium, authors presented concept papers and discussed knowledge-gaps for a research agenda and implications for advancing the IKT field. We took detailed field notes, audio-recorded the meeting and analysed the data using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS:Twenty-four participants attended the meeting, including researchers (n?=?11), trainees (n?=?6) and knowledge users (n?=?7). Seven overarching categories emerged from these proceedings - IKT theory, IKT methods, IKT process, promoting partnership, definitions and distinctions of key IKT terms, capacity-building, and role of funders. Within these categories, priorities identified for future IKT research included: (1) improving clarity about research co-production/IKT theories and frameworks; (2) describing the process for engaging knowledge users; and (3) identifying research co-production/IKT outcomes and methods for evaluation. CONCLUSION:The Integrated Knowledge Translation State of the Science Colloquium initiated a research agenda to advance IKT science and practice. Next steps will focus on building a theoretical and evidence base for IKT.

SUBMITTER: Boland L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6972018 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Building an integrated knowledge translation (IKT) evidence base: colloquium proceedings and research direction.

Boland L L Kothari A A McCutcheon C C Graham I D ID

Health research policy and systems 20200120 1

<h4>Background</h4>Integrated knowledge translation (IKT) is a model of research co-production, whereby researchers partner with knowledge users throughout the research process and who can use the research recommendations in practice or policy. IKT approaches are used to improve the relevance and impact of research. As an emerging field, however, the evidence underpinning IKT is in active development. The Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network represents a collaborative interdisciplin ...[more]

PMID: 31959184

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDespite a growing movement toward a knowledge-user-driven research process, our understanding of the generation, implementation and evaluation of specific approaches in the integrated knowledge translation (iKT) toolbox that aim to engage health and healthcare knowledge users is limited. Health hackathons offer an innovative approach with potential to generate direct and indirect health-related outcomes benefitting participants, knowledge users and the broader population. In May 2019, our research team hosted Waterlupus, a health hackathon to improve the economic lives of individuals with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in Canada. Waterlupus was held with a multi-stakeholder group of 50 participants that included advocacy organization representatives, policy-makers, researchers, physicians, individuals with lived experience and students. While the hackathon generated viable solutions with the potential to positively impact the lives of individuals with SLE, understanding how participants perceived the hackathon as an iKT tool is critical in the planning and implementation of future iKT research.MethodsSemi-structured in-depth telephone interviews were conducted with Waterlupus participants (n = 13) between August and November 2019 to (1) explore participant experiences of the hackathon; (2) investigate participant-identified hackathon outcomes; and (3) elicit recommendations for future iKT research using health hackathons.ResultsParticipants provided feedback on the format and organization of Waterlupus, and identified direct and indirect outcomes to knowledge users, students and researchers beyond the innovations generated at the event. While the majority (n = 11) had never participated in a hackathon prior to Waterlupus, all 13 stated they would participate in future hackathons. Positive outcomes identified include connecting with students and other SLE stakeholders, the formation of professional and support networks, increased awareness of SLE, as well as the innovations generated. Participant recommendations for future health hackathons include the addition of stakeholders from industry or technology, and the need for clear and designated roles for stakeholders to ensure efficient use of resources.ConclusionsThis work contributes to a limited literature regarding the use of health hackathons for social innovation, and offers knowledge-user suggestions relevant to the implementation of future iKT events, and hackathons specifically.

Project description:BackgroundIntegrated knowledge translation (IKT) refers to collaboration between researchers and decision-makers. While advocated as an approach for enhancing the relevance and use of research, IKT is challenging and inconsistently applied. This study sought to inform future IKT practice and research by synthesizing studies that empirically evaluated IKT and identifying knowledge gaps.MethodsWe performed a scoping review. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from 2005 to 2014 for English language studies that evaluated IKT interventions involving researchers and organizational or policy-level decision-makers. Data were extracted on study characteristics, IKT intervention (theory, content, mode, duration, frequency, personnel, participants, timing from initiation, initiator, source of funding, decision-maker involvement), and enablers, barriers, and outcomes reported by studies. We performed content analysis and reported summary statistics.ResultsThirteen studies were eligible after screening 14,754 titles and reviewing 106 full-text studies. Details about IKT activities were poorly reported, and none were formally based on theory. Studies varied in the number and type of interactions between researchers and decision-makers; meetings were the most common format. All studies reported barriers and facilitators. Studies reported a range of positive and sub-optimal outcomes. Outcomes did not appear to be associated with initiator of the partnership, dedicated funding, partnership maturity, nature of decision-maker involvement, presence or absence of enablers or barriers, or the number of different IKT activities.ConclusionsThe IKT strategies that achieve beneficial outcomes remain unknown. We generated a summary of IKT approaches, enablers, barriers, conditions, and outcomes that can serve as the basis for a future review or for planning ongoing primary research. Future research can contribute to three identified knowledge gaps by examining (1) how different IKT strategies influence outcomes, (2) the relationship between the logic or theory underlying IKT interventions and beneficial outcomes, and (3) when and how decision-makers should be involved in the research process. Future IKT initiatives should more systematically plan and document their design and implementation, and evaluations should report the findings with sufficient detail to reveal how IKT was associated with outcomes.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Health care researcher-research user partnerships, referred to as integrated knowledge translation (IKT), have been adopted on an international basis, and are an effective means of co-generating and implementing evidence into policy and practice. Prior research suggests that an initiation period is essential for establishing functional partnerships. To characterize IKT initiation and describe determinants of IKT initiation success, this study explored IKT initiation processes, enablers, and barriers among researchers and research users involved in IKT partnerships. METHODS:A descriptive qualitative approach was used compliant with COREQ standards. Canadian researchers and research users in research collaborations were identified on publicly-available directories and web sites, and referred by those interviewed. They were asked to describe how partnerships were initiated, influencing factors, the length of initiation, and interventions needed to support initiation. Sampling was concurrent with data collection and analysis to achieve thematic saturation. Data were analyzed using constant comparative technique by all members of the research team. RESULTS:In total, 22 individuals from 6 provinces were interviewed (9 researchers, 11 research users, 2 connectors). They confirmed that IKT initiation is a distinct early phase of partnerships. The period ranged from 6 months to 2 years for 75.0% of participants in pre-existing partnerships, to 6 years for newly-formed partnerships. High-level themes were: Newly identifying and securing partners is an intensive process; Processes and activities take place over a protracted period through multiple interactions; Identifying and engaging committed partners is reliant on funding; and Partnership building is challenged by maintaining continuity and enthusiasm. Participants underscored the need for an IKT partner matching forum, IKT initiation toolkit, and funding for non-research activities required during IKT initiation to establish functional researcher-research user partnerships. Themes were largely similar regardless of participant years of experience with IKT or being involved in a new versus pre-existing partnership. CONCLUSIONS:IKT initiation is a recognized and important early phase of IKT that establishes functional partnerships, and once established, ongoing partnership for subsequent projects is likely. Further research is needed to develop and evaluate approaches recommended by participants for stimulating IKT initiation.

Project description:BackgroundResearch funders in Canada and abroad have made substantial investments in supporting collaborative research approaches to generating and translating knowledge as it is believed to increase knowledge use. Canadian health research funders have advocated for the use of integrated knowledge translation (IKT) in health research, however, there is limited research around how IKT compares to other collaborative research approaches. Our objective was to better understand how IKT compares with engaged scholarship, Mode 2 research, co-production and participatory research by identifying the differences and similarities among them in order to provide conceptual clarity and reduce researcher and knowledge user confusion about these common approaches.MethodsWe employed a qualitative descriptive method using interview data to better understand experts' perspectives and experiences on collaborative research approaches. Participants' responses were analysed through thematic analysis to elicit core themes. The analysis was centred around the concept of IKT, as it is the most recent approach; IKT was then compared and contrasted with engaged scholarship, Mode 2 research, co-production and participatory research. As this was an iterative process, data triangulation and member-checking were conducted with participants to ensure accuracy of the emergent themes and analysis process.ResultsDifferences were noted in the orientation (i.e. original purpose), historical roots (i.e. disciplinary origin) and partnership/engagement (i.e. role of partners etc.). Similarities among the approaches included (1) true partnerships rather than simple engagement, (2) focus on essential components and processes rather than labels, (3) collaborative research orientations rather than research methods, (4) core values and principles, and (5) extensive time and financial investment. Core values and principles among the approaches included co-creation, reciprocity, trust, fostering relationships, respect, co-learning, active participation, and shared decision-making in the generation and application of knowledge. All approaches require extensive time and financial investment to develop and maintain true partnerships.ConclusionsThis qualitative study is the first to systematically synthesise experts' perspectives and experiences in a comparison of collaborative research approaches. This work contributes to developing a shared understanding of collaborative research approaches to facilitate conceptual clarity in use, reporting, indexing and communication among researchers, trainees, knowledge users and stakeholders to advance IKT and implementation science.

Project description:BackgroundThere are increasing expectations for researchers and knowledge users in the health system to use a research partnership approach, such as integrated knowledge translation, to increase the relevance and use of research findings in health practice, programmes and policies. However, little is known about how health research trainees engage in research partnership approaches such as IKT. In response, the purpose of this scoping review was to map and characterize the evidence related to using an IKT or other research partnership approach from the perspective of health research trainees in thesis and/or postdoctoral work.MethodsWe conducted this scoping review following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and Arksey and O'Malley's framework. We searched the following databases in June 2020: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO. We also searched sources of unpublished studies and grey literature. We reported our findings in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews.ResultsWe included 74 records that described trainees' experiences using an IKT or other research partnership approach to health research. The majority of studies involved collaboration with knowledge users in the research question development, recruitment and data collection stages of the research process. Intersecting barriers to IKT or other research partnerships at the individual, interpersonal and organizational levels were reported, including lack of skills in partnership research, competing priorities and trainees' "outsider" status. We also identified studies that evaluated their IKT approach and reported impacts on partnership formation, such as valuing different perspectives, and enhanced relevance of research.ConclusionOur review provides insights for trainees interested in IKT or other research partnership approaches and offers guidance on how to apply an IKT approach to their research. The review findings can serve as a basis for future reviews and primary research focused on IKT principles, strategies and evaluation. The findings can also inform IKT training efforts such as guideline development and academic programme development.

Project description:IntroductionCollaborative research approaches, such as co-production, co-design, engaged scholarship and integrated knowledge translation (IKT), aim to bridge the evidence to practice and policy gap. There are multiple benefits of collaborative research approaches, but studies report many challenges with establishing and maintaining research partnerships. Researchers often do not have the opportunity to learn how to build collaborative relationships, and most graduate students do not receive formal training in research partnerships. We are unlikely to make meaningful progress in strengthening graduate and postgraduate training on working collaboratively with the health system until we have a better understanding of how students are currently engaging in research partnership approaches. In response, this scoping review aims to map and characterise the evidence related to using an IKT or other research partnership approach from the perspective of health research trainees.Methods and analysisWe will employ methods described by the Joanna Briggs Institute and Arksey and O'Malley's framework for conducting scoping reviews. The reporting will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for scoping reviews checklist. We will include both published and unpublished grey literature and search the following databases: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global databases, Google Scholar and websites from professional bodies and other organisations. Two reviewers will independently screen the articles and extract data using a standardised data collection form. We will narratively describe quantitative data and conduct a thematic analysis of qualitative data. We will map the IKT and other research partnership activities onto the Knowledge to Action cycle and IAP2 Levels of Engagement Framework.Ethics and disseminationNo ethical approval is required for this study. We will share the results in a peer-reviewed, open access publication, conference presentation and stakeholder communications.

Project description:BackgroundIn some current healthcare settings, there is a noticeable absence of national institutions committed to the synthesis and use of evidence in healthcare decision- and policy-making. This absence creates a need to broaden the responsibilities of healthcare providers to include knowledge brokering and advocacy in order to optimize knowledge translation to other stakeholders, especially policy-makers. However, this process requires practitioners and researchers to acquire certain types of knowledge and skills. This article introduces two innovative methods for capacity building in knowledge translation (KT).MethodsDuring a workshop aimed at preparing 21 trainers in evidence-based medicine, two innovative methods were used: (1) debate and (2) a knowledge translation project (KTP). The main objective of the debates approach was to strengthen participants' critical thinking abilities by requiring them to search for and appraise evidence and defend their arguments. The KTP was used to introduce participants to the essential steps of knowledge translation and to suggest an extended role for healthcare practitioners, i.e., using evidence to manage not only individual patients but also to a community of patients. Participants' performances were assessed according to a pre-designed scheme. At the end of the workshop, participants' opinions and experiences with the innovative teaching methods were evaluated based on their answers to a questionnaire and the results of small-group discussions.ResultsThe participants performed well in both the debate and KTP methods. During post-workshop group discussions, they indicated that the debate approach had added a new dimension to their evidence-based medicine skills by adding purpose and motivation. However, they felt that their performances would have been better if they had been offered practical demonstrations of how to conduct the debate. The participants indicated that the KTP enhanced their understanding of the relationships between evidence and implementation, and motivated them to investigate public health problems in addition to individual patient problems. However, some participants maintained that these issues fell outside the scope of their role as doctors.ConclusionDebates and evidence implementation through KTP are generally well accepted by healthcare practitioners as methods by which they can improve their skills in KT.

Project description:BackgroundOne in five U.S. adults lives with some kind of mental health condition and 4.6% of all U.S. adults have a serious mental illness. The Internet has become the first place for these people to seek online mental health information for help. However, online mental health information is not well-organized and often of low quality. There have been efforts in building evidence-based mental health knowledgebases curated with information manually extracted from the high-quality scientific literature. Manual extraction is inefficient. Crowdsourcing can potentially be a low-cost mechanism to collect labeled data from non-expert laypeople. However, there is not an existing annotation tool integrated with popular crowdsourcing platforms to perform the information extraction tasks. In our previous work, we prototyped a Semantic Text Annotation Tool (STAT) to address this gap.ObjectiveWe aimed to refine the STAT prototype (1) to improve its usability and (2) to enhance the crowdsourcing workflow efficiency to facilitate the construction of evidence-based mental health knowledgebase, following a user-centered design (UCD) approach.MethodsFollowing UCD principles, we conducted four design iterations to improve the initial STAT prototype. In the first two iterations, usability testing focus groups were conducted internally with 8 participants recruited from a convenient sample, and the usability was evaluated with a modified System Usability Scale (SUS). In the following two iterations, usability testing was conducted externally using the Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) platform. In each iteration, we summarized the usability testing results through thematic analysis, identified usability issues, and conducted a heuristic evaluation to map identified usability issues to Jakob Nielsen's usability heuristics. We collected suggested improvements in the usability testing sessions and enhanced STAT accordingly in the next UCD iteration. After four UCD iterations, we conducted a case study of the system on MTurk using mental health related scientific literature. We compared the performance of crowdsourcing workers with two expert annotators from two aspects: efficiency and quality.ResultsThe SUS score increased from 70.3 ± 12.5 to 81.1 ± 9.8 after the two internal UCD iterations as we improved STAT's functionality based on the suggested improvements. We then evaluated STAT externally through MTurk in the following two iterations. The SUS score decreased to 55.7 ± 20.1 in the third iteration, probably because of the complexity of the tasks. After further simplification of STAT and the annotation tasks with an improved annotation guideline, the SUS score increased to 73.8 ± 13.8 in the fourth iteration of UCD. In the evaluation case study, on average, the workers spent 125.5 ± 69.2 s on the onboarding tutorial and the crowdsourcing workers spent significantly less time on the annotation tasks compared to the two experts. In terms of annotation quality, the workers' annotation results achieved average F1-scores ranged from 0.62 to 0.84 for the different sentences.ConclusionsWe successfully developed a web-based semantic text annotation tool, STAT, to facilitate the curation of semantic web knowledgebases through four UCD iterations. The lessons learned from the UCD process could serve as a guide to further enhance STAT and the development and design of other crowdsourcing-based semantic text annotation tasks. Our study also showed that a well-organized, informative annotation guideline is as important as the annotation tool itself. Further, we learned that a crowdsourcing task should consist of multiple simple microtasks rather than a complicated task.

Dataset Information

Building an integrated knowledge translation (IKT) evidence base: colloquium proceedings and research direction.

Publications

Building an integrated knowledge translation (IKT) evidence base: colloquium proceedings and research direction.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets