For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
4
views
21
references
 Top references
cited by
1
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      71
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Fostering implementation of knowledge into health practice: study protocol for the validation and redevelopment of the Knowledge Uptake and Utilization Tool

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Measurement of what knowledge is taken-up and how that information is used to inform practice and policies can provide an understanding about the effectiveness of knowledge uptake and utilization processes. In 2007, the Knowledge Uptake and Utilization Tool (KUUT) was developed to evaluate the implementation of knowledge into practice. The KUUT has been used by numerous large health organizations despite limited validity evidence and a narrow understanding about how the tool is used in practice and interpreted by users. As such, the overall purpose of this protocol is to redevelop the KUUT and gather validity evidence to examine and support its use in various health-related organizations. This protocol paper outlines a validation and redevelopment procedure for the KUUT using the unitary view of validity.

          Methods

          The protocol outlined in this article proceeds through four phases, starting with redeveloping the tool, then evaluating validity evidence based on: test content, response processes and internal structure. The initial phase gathers information to redevelop the tool, and evaluates item content and response format. The second phase evaluates response process validity evidence by examining how a variety of users interact with the tool. In the third phase, the tool will be pilot tested with knowledge users and, in the final phase, psychometric properties of the tool will be examined and a final scoring structure will be determined. A knowledge translation plan described herein outlines where the final tool will be housed and how the information about the tool will be disseminated.

          Discussion

          This protocol outlines a procedure to gather different sources of validity evidence for the KUUT. By addressing limitations in the original KUUT, such as complexities with scoring, a redeveloped KUUT supporting validity evidence will enhance the ability of health-related organizations to effectively use this tool for its intended purpose.

          Related collections

          Most cited references21

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          How Can Research Organizations More Effectively Transfer Research Knowledge to Decision Makers?

          John Lavis, Dave Robertson, JENNIFER M. WOODSIDE … (2003)
          Article 0 comments Cited 231 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Using realist evaluation to open the black box of knowledge translation: a state-of-the-art review

            Katherine L Salter, Anita Kothari (2014)
            Background In knowledge translation, complex interventions may be implemented in the attempt to improve uptake of research-based knowledge in practice. Traditional evaluation efforts that focus on aggregate effectiveness represent an oversimplification of both the environment and the interventions themselves. However, theory-based approaches to evaluation, such as realist evaluation (RE), may be better-suited to examination of complex knowledge translation interventions with a view to understanding what works, for whom, and under what conditions. It is the aim of the present state-of-the-art review to examine current literature with regard to the use of RE in the assessment of knowledge translation interventions implemented within healthcare environments. Methods Multiple online databases were searched from 1997 through June 2013. Primary studies examining the application or implementation of knowledge translation interventions within healthcare settings and using RE were selected for inclusion. Varying applications of RE across studies were examined in terms of a) reporting of core elements of RE, and b) potential feasibility of this evaluation method. Results A total of 14 studies (6 study protocols), published between 2007 and 2013, were identified for inclusion. Projects were initiated in a variety of healthcare settings and represented a range of interventions. While a majority of authors mentioned context (C), mechanism (M) and outcome (O), a minority reported the development of C-M-O configurations or testable hypotheses based on these configurations. Four completed studies reported results that included refinement of proposed C-M-O configurations and offered explanations within the RE framework. In the few studies offering insight regarding challenges associated with the use of RE, difficulties were expressed regarding the definition of both mechanisms and contextual factors. Overall, RE was perceived as time-consuming and resource intensive. Conclusions The use of RE in knowledge translation is relatively new; however, theory-building approaches to the examination of complex interventions in this area may be increasing as researchers attempt to identify what works, for whom and under what circumstances. Completion of the RE cycle may be challenging, particularly in the development of C-M-O configurations; however, as researchers approach challenges and explore innovations in its application, rich and detailed accounts may improve feasibility.
            Article 0 comments Cited 105 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Moving knowledge into action for more effective practice, programmes and policy: protocol for a research programme on integrated knowledge translation

              Ian Graham, Anita Kothari, Chris McCutcheon … (2018)
              Background Health research is conducted with the expectation that it advances knowledge and eventually translates into improved health systems and population health. However, research findings are often caught in the know-do gap: they are not acted upon in a timely way or not applied at all. Integrated knowledge translation (IKT) is advanced as a way to increase the relevance, applicability and impact of research. With IKT, knowledge users work with researchers throughout the research process, starting with identification of the research question. Knowledge users represent those who would be able to use research results to inform their decisions (e.g. clinicians, managers, policy makers, patients/families and others). Stakeholders are increasingly interested in the idea that IKT generates greater and faster societal impact. Stakeholders are all those who are interested in the use of research results but may not necessarily use them for their own decision-making (e.g. governments, funders, researchers, health system managers and policy makers, patients and clinicians). Although IKT is broadly accepted, the actual research supporting it is limited and there is uncertainty about how best to conduct and support IKT. This paper presents a protocol for a programme of research testing the assumption that engaging the users of research in phases of its production leads to (a) greater appreciation of and capacity to use research; (b) the production of more relevant, useful and applicable research that results in greater impact; and (c) conditions under which it is more likely that research results will influence policy, managerial and clinical decision-making. Methods The research programme will adopt an interdisciplinary, international, cross-sector approach, using multiple and mixed methods to reflect the complex and social nature of research partnerships. We will use ongoing and future natural IKT experiments as multiple cases to study IKT in depth, and we will take advantage of the team’s existing relationships with provincial, national and international organizations. Case studies will be retrospective and prospective, and the 7-year grant period will enable longitudinal studies. The initiation of partnerships, funding processes, the research lifecycle and then outcomes/impacts post project will be studied in real time. These living laboratories will also allow testing of strategies to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the IKT approach. Discussion This is the first interdisciplinary, systematic and programmatic research study on IKT. The research will provide scientific evidence on how to reliably and validly measure collaborative research partnerships and their impacts. The proposed research will build the science base for IKT, assess its relationship with research use and identify best practices and appropriate conditions for conducting IKT to achieve the greatest impact. It will also train and mentor the next generation of IKT researchers.
              Article 0 comments Cited 99 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Kelly Skinner:
                ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0989-8841
                kskinner@uwaterloo.ca
                Journal
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): Health Res Policy Syst
                Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Health Res Policy Syst
                Title: Health Research Policy and Systems
                Publisher: BioMed Central (London )
                ISSN (Electronic): 1478-4505
                Publication date (Electronic): 27 December 2019
                Publication date PMC-release: 27 December 2019
                Publication date Collection: 2019
                Volume: 17
                Electronic Location Identifier: 105
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2288 9830, GRID grid.17091.3e, Measurement, Evaluation and Research Methodology program, Department of Educational and Counselling Psychology, and Special Education, , University of British Columbia, ; Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4 Canada
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0000 8644 1405, GRID grid.46078.3d, School of Public Health and Health Systems, , University of Waterloo, ; Waterloo, ON N2L 3G1 Canada
                [3 ]ISNI 0000 0001 1958 9263, GRID grid.268252.9, Department of Health Sciences, , Wilfrid Laurier University, ; Waterloo, ON N2C 3C5 Canada
                [4 ]ISNI 0000 0000 8793 5925, GRID grid.155956.b, Institute for Mental Health Policy Research, , Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, ; London, ON N6G 4X8 Canada
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7082-3075
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0989-8841
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0196-3410
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9926-8442
                Article
                Publisher ID: 503
                DOI: 10.1186/s12961-019-0503-5
                PMC ID: 6935203
                PubMed ID: 31881892
                SO-VID: 462ef4be-1b6f-42a5-969d-0c46c6919765
                Copyright © © The Author(s). 2019
                License:

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                Date received : 23 October 2019
                Date accepted : 4 November 2019
                Funding
                Funded by: Performance and Planning Exchange (PPX)
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100004490, University of Waterloo;
                Categories
                Subject: Study Protocol
                Custom metadata
                issue-copyright-statement © The Author(s) 2019

                ScienceOpen disciplines: Health & Social care
                Keywords: validation,knowledge uptake and utilization,integrated knowledge translation,knowledge translation,implementation,knowledge transfer and exchange,tools,unified validity theory
                Data availability:
                ScienceOpen disciplines: Health & Social care
                Keywords: validation, knowledge uptake and utilization, integrated knowledge translation, knowledge translation, implementation, knowledge transfer and exchange, tools, unified validity theory

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content71

                See all similar

                Cited by1

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors415

                See all reference authors