Article type
Year
Abstract
Background: Knowledge synthesis (KS) is the cornerstone for evidence-based healthcare decision-making and optimizing patient outcomes, and a key component of the Knowledge to Action Framework. Yet, KS activities will only have impact if accompanied by a strong knowledge translation (KT) plan including knowledge users and decision makers. Supporting KS is an integral part of the Alberta Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research (SPOR) SUPPORT Unit KT Platform. Since April 2016 the KT Platform has provided consultation and support services on a range of KS projects.
Objectives: 1) Understand the supports and services required by our clients, maximize resource utilization, and build on lessons learned; and 2) identify opportunities and mechanisms to integrate KT into the KS process to optimize research uptake and impact.
Methods: From April 2016 to February 2020 the KT Platform supported 142 projects. For each project, data were collected from applications for services and consultation notes with a follow-up survey sent to the principal investigator of each completed project (n=83). The survey was designed to gather information on KT considerations, knowledge user involvement, and resulting dissemination products. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics; qualitative data underwent thematic analysis.
Results: Among all 142 projects, the majority focused on clinical topics (68%) with systematic reviews the most common methodology (55%), followed by rapid reviews (24%) and scoping reviews (13%). Survey response rate was 76% (63/83 completed projects). One third of respondents (33%) indicated a KT plan. Various knowledge users were involved, most commonly healthcare practitioners (41%), individual patients and/or patient organizations (34%) and policy makers (27%). Knowledge users were involved in: interpreting findings (82%), messaging and disseminating results (45%), shaping research questions (33%), deciding on methodology (31%), and helping with data collection and tool development (11%). Review results have been used for a variety of purposes, e.g. decision aids, clinical practice guidelines, grant applications, and subsequent projects. To date, 51 reviews (61%) have yielded dissemination products including 43 presentations and 70 publications.
Conclusions: The KT Platform has supported a large number of KS projects with the potential to impact patient outcomes; however, only a third had a KT plan. Among those with a KT plan a variety of knowledge users were involved and a range of products have emerged intended to bridge the research-practice gap. Nevertheless, our data demonstrate that more work is required to enhance linkages between KS research and KT activities to ensure optimal impact on patient outcomes.
Patient or healthcare consumer involvement: Patients and patient organizations were involved in some of the supported projects, however no patients or consumers were involved in this quality improvement project.
Objectives: 1) Understand the supports and services required by our clients, maximize resource utilization, and build on lessons learned; and 2) identify opportunities and mechanisms to integrate KT into the KS process to optimize research uptake and impact.
Methods: From April 2016 to February 2020 the KT Platform supported 142 projects. For each project, data were collected from applications for services and consultation notes with a follow-up survey sent to the principal investigator of each completed project (n=83). The survey was designed to gather information on KT considerations, knowledge user involvement, and resulting dissemination products. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics; qualitative data underwent thematic analysis.
Results: Among all 142 projects, the majority focused on clinical topics (68%) with systematic reviews the most common methodology (55%), followed by rapid reviews (24%) and scoping reviews (13%). Survey response rate was 76% (63/83 completed projects). One third of respondents (33%) indicated a KT plan. Various knowledge users were involved, most commonly healthcare practitioners (41%), individual patients and/or patient organizations (34%) and policy makers (27%). Knowledge users were involved in: interpreting findings (82%), messaging and disseminating results (45%), shaping research questions (33%), deciding on methodology (31%), and helping with data collection and tool development (11%). Review results have been used for a variety of purposes, e.g. decision aids, clinical practice guidelines, grant applications, and subsequent projects. To date, 51 reviews (61%) have yielded dissemination products including 43 presentations and 70 publications.
Conclusions: The KT Platform has supported a large number of KS projects with the potential to impact patient outcomes; however, only a third had a KT plan. Among those with a KT plan a variety of knowledge users were involved and a range of products have emerged intended to bridge the research-practice gap. Nevertheless, our data demonstrate that more work is required to enhance linkages between KS research and KT activities to ensure optimal impact on patient outcomes.
Patient or healthcare consumer involvement: Patients and patient organizations were involved in some of the supported projects, however no patients or consumers were involved in this quality improvement project.