The nature of evidence resources and knowledge translation for health promotion practitioners.

Cochrane Health Promotion and Public Health Field, Melbourne, Australia.
Health Promotion International (Impact Factor: 1.94). 10/2007; 22(3):254-60. DOI: 10.1093/heapro/dam017
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Governments and other public health agencies have become increasingly interested in evidence-informed policy and practice. Translating research evidence into programmatic change has proved challenging and the evidence around how to effectively promote and facilitate this process is still relatively limited. This paper presents the findings from an evaluation of a series of evidence-based health promotion resources commissioned by the Victorian Department of Human Services. The evaluation used qualitative methods to explore how practitioners for whom the resources were intended, viewed and used them. Document and literature review and analysis, and a series of key informant interviews and focus groups were conducted. The findings clearly demonstrate that the resources are unlikely to act as agents for change unless they are linked to a knowledge management process that includes practitioner engagement. This paper also considers the potential role of knowledge brokers in helping to identify and translate evidence into practice.

Download full-text


Available from: Elizabeth Waters, Jun 17, 2015
1 Follower
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Knowledge Translation is a process that includes synthesis, dissemination, exchange and application of knowledge to improve the health, services and products In this study we have attempted to examine the knowledge translation practice and its perceived barriers on the universalities and research institutes (research sector) in Iran. Both qualitative and quantitative approaches were used. In the quantitative section, a questionnaire had prepared for this study was completed by 88 authors country wide from randomly selected papers. In the qualitative section 13 in-depth interviews and 6 focus group discussions were held with managers and policy makers, clinical and health service providers, and researchers. Twenty four percent of the authors had no interaction whatsoever with the target audience. Lack of expectation toward creating change in the target audience, researchers' incentives, low level of trust among researchers and decision makers, absence of a predefined mechanism for delivery of research results and inappropriate research priorities were among the most important barriers identified in the qualitative section. Translation of research findings into some concrete outputs which can affect health of people is not in mandate of researchers and subsequently they are not prepared for this as well. Based on the barriers identified, it seems that the following interventions are necessary: cooperation among policy makers at macro and meso (organizational) level and the research sector; establishing networks for researchers and decision makers in choosing the research topic, priority setting, and building trust among researchers and policy makers.
    Iranian Journal of Public Health 07/2014; 43(7):968-80. · 0.58 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Facets of Public Health in Europe, first edited by Bernd Rechel and Martin McKee, 07/2014: chapter Knowledge brokering in public health: pages 301-316; Open University Press McGraw Hill Education., ISBN: ISBN-13:978-0-33-526420-9
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In Evidence Based Policy Making, pilot projects have been recognized as important tools to develop 'evidence' of policy innovations. This paper presents a theoretical and empirical study of three water management pilot projects in the Rhine basin to deepen understanding of how they can contri-bute to EBPM and which limitations and problems may arise when realizing EBPM. Three types of pilot projects have been identified: research, mana-gerial and political-entrepreneurial pilot projects. To different extent all types of pilot project have the following effects: biophysical-and actor-network system response, knowledge development and diffusion into wider public policy. The Beuningen pilot demonstrated that anticipated evidence can be sufficient to change policy or management due to its strong mana-gerial characteristics and that the lack of policy ambassadors limits its insti-tutionalization. The Basel case illustrated the importance of interpretation of evidences and the consequences of the use of evidence as alibi. The Alten-heim case demonstrated that top-down research pilot projects are easily in-stitutionalized but lack to take the step to dissemination. In order to contri-bute to the realization of EBPM, pilot projects might need to be designed as both a means to develop and to transfer evidence through experience. Pilot Projects for Evidence Based Policy 116 Zusammenfassung Im Rahmen von evidenzbasierter Politikgestaltung (EBP) werden Pilotpro-jekte als wichtiges Instrument betrachtet, um Erkenntnisse (Evidenz) über politische Innovationen zu generieren. Dieser Beitrag präsentiert eine theo-retische und empirische Analyse von drei Wassermanagement Pilotprojek-ten im Rheinland. Ziel der Analyse ist, besser zu verstehen, wie solche Projkete zu EBP beitragen und welche Grenzen und Probleme bei der Reali-sierung von EBP auftreten können. Es wurden drei Typen von Pilotprojek-ten identifiziert: wissenschaftliche, betriebliche und politisch-unternehmerische Pilotprojekte. Solche Pilotprojekte können in unterschied-lichem Ausmass folgende Effekten haben: biophysische-und Akteur-Netzwerk-Systemrückmeldungen, Wissensentwicklung und Diffusion in weitere Bereiche. Das Beuningen Projekt demonstrierte, dass im Falle eines stark unternehmerischen Pilotprojkets antizipierte Evidenz für eine Politik-oder Managementänderung ausreichen kann. Das Fehlen von politischen Repräsentaten hingegen limitierte die Institutionalisierung in diesem Fall. Das Pilotprojekt Basel veranschaulicht die Bedeutsamkeit des Interpretie-rens von Evidenz und die Konsequenzen der Nutzung von Evidenz als Ali-bi. Der Fall Polder Altenheim zeigt, dass Top-Down Pilotprojekte leicht zu institutionalisieren sind, jedoch kaum eine weitere Verbreitung finden. Da-mit Pilotprojekte einen Beitrag zur evdienzbasierten Politikgestaltung leis-ten können, ist es vermutlich notwendig, sie so zu gestalten, dass sie sowohl der Evidenzentwicklung als auch dem Evidenztransfer durch Erfahrung die-nen.