Dataset Information

Bridging the research-practice gap in healthcare: a rapid review of research translation centres in England and Australia.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Large-scale partnerships between universities and health services are widely seen as vehicles for bridging the evidence-practice gap and for accelerating the adoption of new evidence in healthcare. Recently, different versions of these partnerships - often called academic health science centres - have been established across the globe. Although they differ in structure and processes, all aim to improve the integration of research and education with health services. Collectively, these entities are often referred to as Research Translation Centres (RTCs) and both England and Australia have developed relatively new and funded examples of these collaborative centres. METHODS:This paper presents findings from a rapid review of RTCs in Australia and England that aimed to identify their structures, leadership, workforce development and strategies for involving communities and service users. The review included published academic and grey literature with a customised search of the Google search engine and RTC websites. RESULTS:RTCs are complex system-level interventions that will need to disrupt the current paradigms and silos inherent in healthcare, education and research in order to meet their aims. This will require vision, leadership, collaborations and shared learnings, alongside structures, processes and strategies to deliver impact in the face of complexity. The impact of RTCs in overcoming the deeply entrenched silos across organisations, disciplines and sectors needs to be captured at the systems, organisation and individual levels. This includes workforce capacity and public and patient involvement that are vital to understanding the evolution of RTCs. In addition, new models of leadership are needed to support the brokering and mobilisation of knowledge in complex organisations. CONCLUSIONS:The development and funding of RTCs represents one of the most significant shifts in the health research landscape and it is imperative that we continue to explore how we can progress the integration of research and healthcare and ensure research meets stakeholder needs and is translated via the collaborations supported by these organisations. Because RTCs are a recent addition to the healthcare landscape in Australia, it is instructive to review the processes and infrastructure needed to support their implementation and applied health research in England.

SUBMITTER: Robinson T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7545838 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Bridging the research-practice gap in healthcare: a rapid review of research translation centres in England and Australia.

Robinson Tracy T Bailey Cate C Morris Heather H Burns Prue P Melder Angela A Croft Charlotte C Spyridonidis Dmitrios D Bismantara Halyo H Skouteris Helen H Teede Helena H

Health research policy and systems 20201009 1

<h4>Background</h4>Large-scale partnerships between universities and health services are widely seen as vehicles for bridging the evidence-practice gap and for accelerating the adoption of new evidence in healthcare. Recently, different versions of these partnerships - often called academic health science centres - have been established across the globe. Although they differ in structure and processes, all aim to improve the integration of research and education with health services. Collectivel ...[more]

PMID: 33036634

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background Over the past decade, Research Translation Centres (RTCs) have been established in many countries. These centres (sometimes referred to as Academic Health Science Centres) are designed to bring universities and healthcare providers together in order to accelerate the generation and translation of new evidence that is responsive to health service and community priorities. This has the potential to effectively ‘flip’ the traditional research and education paradigms because it requires active participation and continuous engagement with stakeholders (especially service users, the community and frontline clinicians). Although investment and expectations of RTCs are high, the literature confirms a need to better understand the processes that RTCs use to mobilise knowledge, build workforce capacity, and co-produce research with patients and the public to ensure population impact and drive healthcare improvement. Methods Semi-structured interviews were conducted with selected leaders and members from select RTCs in England and Australia. Convenience sampling was utilised to identify RTCs, based on their geography, accessibility and availability. Purposive sampling and a snowballing approach were employed to recruit individual participants for interviews, which were conducted face to face or via videoconferencing. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using a reflexive and inductive approach. This involved two researchers comparing codes and interrogating themes that were analysed inductively against the study aims and through meetings with the research team. Results A total of 41 participants, 22 from England and 19 from Australia were interviewed. Five major themes emerged, including (1) dissonant metrics, (2) different models of leadership, (3) public and patient involvement and research co-production, (4) workforce development and (5) barriers to collaboration. Conclusions Participants identified the need for performance measures that capture community impact. Better aligned success metrics, enhanced leadership, strategies to partner with patients and the public, enhanced workforce development and strategies to enhance collaboration were all identified as crucial for RTCs to succeed.

Project description:Calls for biodiversity conservation practice to be more evidence based are growing, and we agree evidence use in conservation practice needs improvement. However, evidence-based conservation will not be realized without improved access to evidence. In medicine, unlike in conservation, a well-established and well-funded layer of intermediary individuals and organizations engage with medical practitioners, synthesize primary research relevant to decision making, and make evidence easily accessible. These intermediaries prepare targeted evidence summaries and distribute them to practitioners faced with time-sensitive and value-laden decisions. To be effective, these intermediaries, who we refer to as evidence bridges, should identify research topics based on the priorities of practitioners; synthesize evidence; prepare and distribute easy-to-find and easy-to-use evidence summaries; and develop and maintain networks of connections with researchers and practitioners. Based on a review of the literature regarding evidence intermediaries in conservation and environmental management, as well as an anonymous questionnaire searching for such organizations, we found few intermediaries that met all these criteria. Few evidence bridges that do exist are unable to reach most conservation practitioners, which include resource managers in government and industry, conservation organizations, and farmers and other private landowners. We argue that the lack of evidence bridges from research to practitioners contributes to evidence complacency and limits the use of evidence in conservation action. Nevertheless, several existing organizations help reduce the gap between evidence and practice and could serve as a foundation for building additional components of evidence bridges in conservation. Although evidence bridges need expertise in research and evidence synthesis, they also require expertise in identifying and communicating with the community of practitioners most in need of clear and concise syntheses of evidence. Article Impact Statement: Evidence-based conservation will not be realized without improved access to evidence. We call for intermediary evidence bridges.

Project description:We present pyOsiriX, a plugin built for the already popular dicom viewer OsiriX that provides users the ability to extend the functionality of OsiriX through simple Python scripts. This approach allows users to integrate the many cutting-edge scientific/image-processing libraries created for Python into a powerful DICOM visualisation package that is intuitive to use and already familiar to many clinical researchers. Using pyOsiriX we hope to bridge the apparent gap between basic imaging scientists and clinical practice in a research setting and thus accelerate the development of advanced clinical image processing. We provide arguments for the use of Python as a robust scripting language for incorporation into larger software solutions, outline the structure of pyOsiriX and how it may be used to extend the functionality of OsiriX, and we provide three case studies that exemplify its utility. For our first case study we use pyOsiriX to provide a tool for smooth histogram display of voxel values within a user-defined region of interest (ROI) in OsiriX. We used a kernel density estimation (KDE) method available in Python using the scikit-learn library, where the total number of lines of Python code required to generate this tool was 22. Our second example presents a scheme for segmentation of the skeleton from CT datasets. We have demonstrated that good segmentation can be achieved for two example CT studies by using a combination of Python libraries including scikit-learn, scikit-image, SimpleITK and matplotlib. Furthermore, this segmentation method was incorporated into an automatic analysis of quantitative PET-CT in a patient with bone metastases from primary prostate cancer. This enabled repeatable statistical evaluation of PET uptake values for each lesion, before and after treatment, providing estaimes maximum and median standardised uptake values (SUVmax and SUVmed respectively). Following treatment we observed a reduction in lesion volume, SUVmax and SUVmed for all lesions, in agreement with a reduction in concurrent measures of serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA).

Dataset Information

Bridging the research-practice gap in healthcare: a rapid review of research translation centres in England and Australia.

Publications

Bridging the research-practice gap in healthcare: a rapid review of research translation centres in England and Australia.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets