Search

Less than one third of research evidence is translated into policy or practice. Knowledge translation requires effective dissemination, adoption and finally implementation. These three stages are equally important, however, existing knowledge translation models and frameworks provide little and disparate information about the steps and activities required for effective dissemination. This study aimed to empirically develop a consolidated framework of evidence-based steps and activities for disseminating research evidence. We identified models and frameworks from a scoping review and dissemination and implementation webtool. We synthesised them into a prototype dissemination framework. Models and frameworks were eligible to inform steps in our framework if they fulfilled at least one of three elements of dissemination: intending to generate awareness of a message, incorporates targeting an audience: tailoring communication. An initial coding framework was created to organise data into dissemination steps. Drawing on 'co-approach' principles, authors of the included models and frameworks (dissemination experts) and health service researchers (end users) were invited to test and refine the prototype framework at a workshop. From 48 models and frameworks reviewed, only 32 fulfilled one or more of the three dissemination elements. The initial coding framework, upon refinement, yielded the Guide to Disseminating Research (GuiDiR) comprising five steps. 1) Identify target audiences and dissemination partners. 2) Engage with dissemination partners. 3) Identify barriers and enablers to dissemination. 4) Create dissemination messages. 5) Disseminate and evaluate. Multiple activities were identified for each step and no single model or framework represents all steps and activities in GuiDiR. GuiDiR unifies dissemination components from knowledge translation models and frameworks and harmonises language into a format accessible to non-experts. It outlines for researchers, funders and practitioners the expected structure of dissemination and details the activities for executing an evidence-based dissemination strategy. • The Guide to Disseminating Research (GuiDiR) is a unified framework of dissemination steps and activities. • GuiDiR aims to support researchers, funders and practitioners to facilitate planning and executing a dissemination strategy. • GuiDiR is novel in its explicit and comprehensive focus on the process of dissemination. • GuiDiR should be used in combination with knowledge translation frameworks that focus on adoption and/or implementation. • The value of combining dissemination experts and end user opinion in GuiDiR's development is a key strength. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background The gap between research findings and clinical practice is well documented and a range of strategies have been developed to support the implementation of research into clinical practice. The objective of this study was to update and extend two previous reviews of systematic reviews of strategies designed to implement research evidence into clinical practice. Methods We developed a comprehensive systematic literature search strategy based on the terms used in the previous reviews to identify studies that looked explicitly at interventions designed to turn research evidence into practice. The search was performed in June 2022 in four electronic databases: Medline, Embase, Cochrane and Epistemonikos. We searched from January 2010 up to June 2022 and applied no language restrictions. Two independent reviewers appraised the quality of included studies using a quality assessment checklist. To reduce the risk of bias, papers were excluded following discussion between all members of the team. Data were synthesised using descriptive and narrative techniques to identify themes and patterns linked to intervention strategies, targeted behaviours, study settings and study outcomes. Results We identified 32 reviews conducted between 2010 and 2022. The reviews are mainly of multi-faceted interventions (n = 20) although there are reviews focusing on single strategies (ICT, educational, reminders, local opinion leaders, audit and feedback, social media and toolkits). The majority of reviews report strategies achieving small impacts (normally on processes of care). There is much less evidence that these strategies have shifted patient outcomes. Furthermore, a lot of nuance lies behind these headline findings, and this is increasingly commented upon in the reviews themselves. Discussion Combined with the two previous reviews, 86 systematic reviews of strategies to increase the implementation of research into clinical practice have been identified. We need to shift the emphasis away from isolating individual and multi-faceted interventions to better understanding and building more situated, relational and organisational capability to support the use of research in clinical practice. This will involve drawing on a wider range of research perspectives (including social science) in primary studies and diversifying the types of synthesis undertaken to include approaches such as realist synthesis which facilitate exploration of the context in which strategies are employed.

Background: The gap between research findings and clinical practice is well documented and a range of strategies have been developed to support the implementation of research into clinical practice. The objective of this study was to update and extend two previous reviews of systematic reviews of strategies designed to implement research evidence into clinical practice. Methods: We developed a comprehensive systematic literature search strategy based on the terms used in the previous reviews to identify studies that looked explicitly at interventions designed to turn research evidence into practice. The search was performed in June 2022 in four electronic databases: Medline, Embase, Cochrane and Epistemonikos. We searched from January 2010 up to June 2022 and applied no language restrictions. Two independent reviewers appraised the quality of included studies using a quality assessment checklist. To reduce the risk of bias, papers were excluded following discussion between all members of the team. Data were synthesised using descriptive and narrative techniques to identify themes and patterns linked to intervention strategies, targeted behaviours, study settings and study outcomes. Results: We identified 32 reviews conducted between 2010 and 2022. The reviews are mainly of multi-faceted interventions (n = 20) although there are reviews focusing on single strategies (ICT, educational, reminders, local opinion leaders, audit and feedback, social media and toolkits). The majority of reviews report strategies achieving small impacts (normally on processes of care). There is much less evidence that these strategies have shifted patient outcomes. Furthermore, a lot of nuance lies behind these headline findings, and this is increasingly commented upon in the reviews themselves. Discussion: Combined with the two previous reviews, 86 systematic reviews of strategies to increase the implementation of research into clinical practice have been identified. We need to shift the emphasis away from isolating individual and multi-faceted interventions to better understanding and building more situated, relational and organisational capability to support the use of research in clinical practice. This will involve drawing on a wider range of research perspectives (including social science) in primary studies and diversifying the types of synthesis undertaken to include approaches such as realist synthesis which facilitate exploration of the context in which strategies are employed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Historically, telemedicine research is predominantly published in discipline-specific telemedicine journals. However, in recent times the number of publications on telemedicine in clinical journals has increased. Acceptance of telemedicine research by clinical journals indicates a maturing of the telemedicine field. This bibliometric study reviewed telemedicine-related literature published in clinical journals from 2008 to 2018. A search was conducted in PubMed using two types of clinical outlets. (1) Top 20 journals with highest Impact Factor in the field of Medicine. (2) Top five journals with highest Impact Factor in most common Medical Specialty Areas. Analysis showed that there is a steady growth of literature relating to research and non-research publications appearing in clinical journals. Top five journals in the field of Medicine – BMJ, JAMA, Cochrane database, Medical Journal of Australia and Lancet have published 64% (n = 270) of telemedicine-related articles for the study period. Disease areas associated with telemedicine publications are consistent with global disease priorities. The review demonstrated that the most significant increase in telemedicine research published in clinical journals was focused on patient care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: After a traumatic incident in the workplace organisations want to provide support for their employees to prevent PTSD. However, what is safe and effective to offer has not yet been established, despite many organisations offering some form of intervention after a traumatic event. Objective: To systematically review the evidence for post-incident psychosocial interventions offered within one month of a workplace trauma, and to compare the content, effectiveness and acceptability of these interventions. Given the lack of a yet clearly established evidence-base in this field, we sought to examine both published empirical research as well as guidelines published by expert groups working with staff in high-risk roles. Methods: We conducted systematic searches for empirical research across bibliographic databases and searched online for clinical practice guidelines to April 2023. We were also referred to potentially relevant literature by experts in workplace trauma. Both empirical research and clinical guidelines were appraised for their quality. Results: A total of 80 research studies and 11 clinical practice guidelines were included in the review. Interventions included Critical Incident Stress Debriefing (CISD), Critical Incident Stress Management (CISM), unspecified Debriefing, Trauma Risk Management (TRiM), Psychological First Aid (PFA), EMDR, CBT and group counselling. Most research and guidance were of poor quality. The findings of this review do not demonstrate any harm caused by CISD, CISM, PFA, TRiM, EMDR, group counselling or CBT interventions when delivered in a workplace setting. However, they do not conclusively demonstrate benefits of these interventions nor do they establish superiority of any specific intervention. Generic debriefing was associated with some negative outcomes. Current clinical guidelines were inconsistent with the current research evidence base. Nevertheless, interventions were generally valued by workers. Conclusions: Better quality research and guidance is urgently needed, including more detailed exploration of the specific aspects of delivery of post-incident interventions. Organisations often seek to provide some form of psychosocial intervention after a traumatic event in the workplace. Previous reviews have contraindicated particular forms of 'debriefing', however, the evidence for post-incident psychosocial interventions in the workplace has not previously been systematically reviewed. Research evidence was generally of poor quality with limited evidence of effectiveness and clinical guidelines were inconsistent with the evidence. Nevertheless, research did not demonstrate harm from most established interventions and support was valued by workers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

International research findings offer inclusive education teachers various pedagogical tools to support student diversity in inclusive classrooms to counter educational disadvantages. However, according to previous research, embedding research evidence in pedagogical practice at the classroom level is rare in schools. Our study explored Ghanaian teachers' perspectives in 10 purposively selected inclusive Basic Schools in Ghana. The study focused on teachers' frequency of use of Research-Based Information (RBI), the type of use of RBI, opinions about RBI, awareness of useful activities that facilitate the use of RBI, individual expertise, or skills necessary for RBI use in everyday practice, organizational factors that influence the use of RBI. The study identified non-use and minimal to moderate use of RBI in professional practice. Sources of RBI were mostly from non-scholarly journals because the schools did not subscribe to peer-reviewed journals, and teachers were not willing to use their financial resources to access close-ended journal articles. An independent t -test was not significant between female and male participants. However, a Pearson product-moment correlation to assess the relationship between the various factors about RBI use found positive associations between organizational factors and expertise and between awareness factors and expertise to use RBI. Education must promote increased adoption of RBI in professional practice to enhance educational quality for all students. This can be accomplished by building ongoing solid school-university partnerships to develop context-specific frameworks that support inclusive teachers to conduct and use more research in their practice. Plain Language Summary: Teachers' views on research-informed teaching This study explored Ghanaian basic school teachers' perspectives on the frequency of use of Research-Based Information (RBI), the type of use of RBI, opinions about RBI, awareness of useful activities that facilitate the use of RBI, individual expertise, or skills necessary for RBI use in everyday practice, organisational factors that influence the use of RBI. The study utilised a descriptive survey approach, and the findings identified non-use and minimal to moderate use of RBI in professional practice. Sources of RBI the teachers often utilised were mostly from non-scholarly journals because the schools did not subscribe to peer-reviewed journals, and teachers were not willing to use their financial resources to access close-ended journal articles. Female and male participants did not differ in their approaches to RBI use. However, we found positive relations between organisational factors and expertise and between awareness factors and expertise to use RBI. It is important to support teachers to increase adoption of RBI in professional practice to enhance educational quality for all students. This can be accomplished by building ongoing solid school-university partnerships to develop context-specific frameworks that support inclusive teachers to conduct and use more research in their practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Cardiovascular clinical prediction rules (CPRs) are widely used in primary care. They accumulate research evidence through derivation, external validation, and impact studies. However, existing knowledge about the influence of research evidence on the use of CPRs is limited. Therefore, we explored how primary care clinicians’ perceptions of and experiences with research influence their use of cardiovascular CPRs. Methods We conducted an exploratory qualitative interview study with thematic analysis. Primary care clinicians were recruited from the WWAMI (Washington, Wyoming, Alaska, Montana and Idaho) region Practice and Research Network (WPRN). We used purposeful sampling to ensure maximum variation within the participant group. Data were collected by conducting semi-structured online interviews. We analyzed data using inductive thematic analysis to identify commonalities and differences within themes. Results Of 29 primary care clinicians who completed the questionnaire, 15 participated in the interview. We identified two main themes relating to the influence of clinicians’ perceptions of and experiences with cardiovascular CPR research on their decisions about using cardiovascular CPRs: “Seek and judge” and “be acquainted and assume.” When clinicians are familiar with, trust, and feel confident in using research evidence, they might actively search and assess the evidence, which may then influence their decisions about using cardiovascular CPRs. However, clinicians, who are unfamiliar with, distrust, or find it challenging to use research evidence, might be passively acquainted with evidence but do not make their own judgment on the trustworthiness of such evidence. Therefore, these clinicians might not rely on research evidence when making decisions about using cardiovascular CPRs. Conclusions Clinicians’ perceptions and experiences could influence how they use research evidence in decisions about using cardiovascular CPRs. This implies, when promoting evidence-based decisions, it might be useful to target clinicians’ unfamiliarity, distrust, and challenges regarding the use of research evidence rather than focusing only on their knowledge and skills. Further, because clinicians often rely on evidence-unrelated factors, guideline developers and policymakers should recommend cardiovascular CPRs supported by high-quality evidence.

ABSTRACTBackground: After a traumatic incident in the workplace organisations want to provide support for their employees to prevent PTSD. However, what is safe and effective to offer has not yet been established, despite many organisations offering some form of intervention after a traumatic event.Objective: To systematically review the evidence for post-incident psychosocial interventions offered within one month of a workplace trauma, and to compare the content, effectiveness and acceptability of these interventions. Given the lack of a yet clearly established evidence-base in this field, we sought to examine both published empirical research as well as guidelines published by expert groups working with staff in high-risk roles.Methods: We conducted systematic searches for empirical research across bibliographic databases and searched online for clinical practice guidelines to April 2023. We were also referred to potentially relevant literature by experts in workplace trauma. Both empirical research and clinical guidelines were appraised for their quality.Results: A total of 80 research studies and 11 clinical practice guidelines were included in the review. Interventions included Critical Incident Stress Debriefing (CISD), Critical Incident Stress Management (CISM), unspecified Debriefing, Trauma Risk Management (TRiM), Psychological First Aid (PFA), EMDR, CBT and group counselling. Most research and guidance were of poor quality. The findings of this review do not demonstrate any harm caused by CISD, CISM, PFA, TRiM, EMDR, group counselling or CBT interventions when delivered in a workplace setting. However, they do not conclusively demonstrate benefits of these interventions nor do they establish superiority of any specific intervention. Generic debriefing was associated with some negative outcomes. Current clinical guidelines were inconsistent with the current research evidence base. Nevertheless, interventions were generally valued by workers.Conclusions: Better quality research and guidance is urgently needed, including more detailed exploration of the specific aspects of delivery of post-incident interventions.

Background: Cardiovascular clinical prediction rules (CPRs) are widely used in primary care. They accumulate research evidence through derivation, external validation, and impact studies. However, existing knowledge about the influence of research evidence on the use of CPRs is limited. Therefore, we explored how primary care clinicians’ perceptions of and experiences with research influence their use of cardiovascular CPRs. Methods: We conducted an exploratory qualitative interview study with thematic analysis. Primary care clinicians were recruited from the WWAMI (Washington, Wyoming, Alaska, Montana and Idaho) region Practice and Research Network (WPRN). We used purposeful sampling to ensure maximum variation within the participant group. Data were collected by conducting semi-structured online interviews. We analyzed data using inductive thematic analysis to identify commonalities and differences within themes. Results: Of 29 primary care clinicians who completed the questionnaire, 15 participated in the interview. We identified two main themes relating to the influence of clinicians’ perceptions of and experiences with cardiovascular CPR research on their decisions about using cardiovascular CPRs: “Seek and judge” and “be acquainted and assume.” When clinicians are familiar with, trust, and feel confident in using research evidence, they might actively search and assess the evidence, which may then influence their decisions about using cardiovascular CPRs. However, clinicians, who are unfamiliar with, distrust, or find it challenging to use research evidence, might be passively acquainted with evidence but do not make their own judgment on the trustworthiness of such evidence. Therefore, these clinicians might not rely on research evidence when making decisions about using cardiovascular CPRs. Conclusions: Clinicians’ perceptions and experiences could influence how they use research evidence in decisions about using cardiovascular CPRs. This implies, when promoting evidence-based decisions, it might be useful to target clinicians’ unfamiliarity, distrust, and challenges regarding the use of research evidence rather than focusing only on their knowledge and skills. Further, because clinicians often rely on evidence-unrelated factors, guideline developers and policymakers should recommend cardiovascular CPRs supported by high-quality evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research provides ample evidence that positive social relations and access to knowledge are supportive for educational change. However, few studies have examined how personnel turnover and restructuring in school districts influence these processes, specifically as they relate to leaders' access to research evidence and perception of organizational learning and culture. In this longitudinal exploratory mixed-methods case study, we examine the changes in social networks and organizational learning among school and district leaders during a 3-year district restructuring process. Our study uses social network analysis, bivariate analyses, and qualitative coding. We surveyed district and school leaders about their districts' capacity for organizational learning, organizational culture, and social ties around research evidence. Our results suggest a decrease in the district's capacity to diffuse ideas from research between Years 1 and 3, which may inhibit efforts for improvement. Further, the data on school and district leaders who did not leave the district indicates a decrease in the perception of organizational learning and culture in school sites, but not in the district with differences between principals and central office staff. Qualitative findings support an association between the restructuring and changes in organizational learning and social structures and provide further reasons for the changes (e.g., lack of communication, time to maintain/build relationships, and opportunities for professional development). These findings speak to the importance of leaders focusing on the social side of change during times of churn, including strengthening trust, fostering collective values and beliefs, and countering division. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explored the link between information literacy (IL) and other factors that enable or inhibit the utilisation of research evidence in policymaking in Zimbabwe. The study assumes that if policymakers possess appropriate IL skills to access, assess, synthesise, and apply research evidence, they will naturally use the evidence to inform their policy decisions. Face-toface interviews with 26 policymakers -- technocrats selected from the Parliament of Zimbabwe and two ministries, Industry and Commerce, and Youth, Sport, and Recreation -- produced evidence to inform the findings and conclusions. Data synthesis using thematic content analysis confirmed the findings. The results show that while IL skills are critical in enabling policymakers' use of research evidence, multiple other factors also influence the use of research evidence in policymaking due to the complexity of the process. The political and socioeconomic context plays a profound role because of the intricate and nonlinear nature of the policymaking process. Therefore, enhancing evidence use in policymaking revolves around strengthening IL skills at the individual level, including institutional and the broader policy ecosystem, by acknowledging and leveraging personal and institutional relationships. This insight illuminates the need to reorient IL programmes to link them to these other factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Knowledge translation (KT) is a set of activities or processes for synthesising, disseminating, and applying research evidence in decision-making for the benefit of society. For KT to be successful, it is paramount for researchers to play an active role in encouraging evidence uptake and use in decisionmaking. We carried out a mapping exercise and interviews with research cluster heads at Cochrane South Africa (CSA) of the KT activities and processes being implemented (or are planned for implementation). We organized the mapping and interview results according to the KT themes described in the Cochrane KT Framework. The KT framework comprises six themes, namely, (i) prioritization and co-production of research evidence; (ii) building a sustainable infrastructure for knowledge translation; (iii) engaging with audiences for knowledge exchange or dialogue; (iv) packaging, communication and dissemination which entails disseminating research to users; (v) building audience capacity to use evidence or training activities; and (vi) advocacy or improving the culture of using evidence. Through the mapping exercise and interviews, we learned that CSA researchers excelled in implementing activities and processes linked to most of the KT themes, including producing different types of systematic reviews and providing reliable evidence for health decision-making. Cochrane South Africa (CSA) researchers are also involved in mentoring and training postgraduate students and various health decision-makers (e.g., health professionals, guideline panels and policy-makers). While they excel in the above-mentioned activities, "packaging, communication, and dissemination of research evidence" (theme iv) was identified as an area of improvement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Despite decades of empirical research in the US and internationally documenting the benefits of implementing syringe services programs (SSPs), their implementation may be controversial in many jurisdictions. Better understanding how research evidence is applied during SSP implementation processes may enable the public health workforce to advocate for program scale up. This study explores applications of research evidence during processes to acquire approvals for SSP implementation in rural counties in Kentucky. Methods In-depth interviews were conducted among eighteen stakeholders (e.g. health department directors, SSP operators) involved in SSP implementation in rural Kentucky counties. Stakeholders were asked to describe the contexts surrounding SSP implementation processes. Interviews were transcribed and analysed for applications of research evidence. Research evidence-related quotes were subsequently categorised based on the typologies for applications of research evidence developed by Weiss et al. (instrumental, conceptual, and symbolic) and a fourth category for instances when research evidence was not used. Results Instrumental applications of research evidence occurred at the intrapersonal and interpersonal levels to dispel concerns about SSPs and formed the basis for implementation support. SSP proponents used research evidence in a conceptual manner to address underlying attitudes and beliefs that were not evidence-based. Participants reported symbolic research evidence applications to justify pre-existing attitudes and beliefs about meeting the public health needs of people who inject drugs. Lastly, in some instances, research evidence was met with scepticism and an unwillingness to consider its merits. Conclusion Applications of research evidence during SSP implementation approval processes in rural Kentucky counties were heterogeneous in nature. Better understanding the diversity of ways in which research evidence may be employed during SSP implementation processes may support efforts to improve the public health of people who inject drugs.Key messages Applications of research evidence during SSP implementation approval processes in rural Kentucky counties were heterogeneous in nature. Instrumental applications of research evidence occurred at the intrapersonal and interpersonal levels to dispel concerns about SSPs and formed the basis for implementation support. SSP proponents used research evidence in a conceptual manner to address underlying attitudes and beliefs that were not evidence-based.

Abstract Background Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic, debilitating disease affecting children worldwide. Several studies have shown the disease to be a significant problem which leads to a diminished quality of life (QoL) for the affected children, but systematic evaluation of such studies in Africa is yet to be reported. Therefore, this scoping review aims to map research evidence on children with AD and their QoL in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Methods The scoping review will follow the Arksey and O’Mally methodological framework. The electronic databases to be searched will include PubMed, EBSCOhost (Academic Search Complete, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Health Sources), and Scopus and Google Scholar, for published literature between 2010 and 2021. The search strategy for the databases will include keywords, Medical Subject Headings terms, and Boolean operators. The reference list of the included sources of evidence and the WHO website will also be consulted for evidence relating to QoL of children with AD in SSA. Two independent reviewers will undertake abstract and full-text article screening with the guidance of eligibility criteria. This review will include studies conducted in SSA, and publications focusing on QoL and associated factors of AD in children. Data will be extracted from the included studies and analyzed qualitatively; NVIVO software V.11 will be used, and the emerging themes reported narratively. The mixed-method appraisal tool (MMAT) will be employed for quality appraisal of included studies. Discussion We look forward to the findings of several studies that describe the QoL and associated factors among children with AD and that report on the use of different diagnostic criteria, severity scaling and QoL measuring scale tools used to ascertain the presence of AD, scale the severity of AD, and the impact of AD on QoL among children. This will help to improve clinical practice and the QoL of children with AD in SSA. The study findings will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal, peer presentations, and presentations at relevant conferences. Conclusion This study will add new knowledge on the QoL in children with AD in the SSA context. The study has the potential to inform research and clinical practice to impact the QoL of children with AD in SSA.

This article will focus on the perennial impact of the Salesian education vision in in Salesian schools in the UK. Following an introduction outlining the history of the Salesian presence in the UK, the Salesian education vision will be explored, focused on its classical characteristics, reason, religion and loving kindness. The decline in the number of professed religious in the UK will be signposted, analogous to the decline across Europe, and the concomitant commitment to a collaboration between the Salesian congregation and lay people in a post-Vatican II context. The nature of Salesian accompaniment will then be surveyed alongside research evidence spanning a decade which constitutes evidential support for the perennial impact of the Salesian education vision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article discusses what we know about the underlying social and political conditions shaping research evidence use in education and how this applies to Research-Practice Partnerships (RPPs). It discusses types of use, political dynamics and processes, brokers and intermediaries, and racial dynamics and lenses. It also recommends strategies for RPPs in light of these political and social contexts to improve the quality of use and reduce the misuse of research evidence, ending with implications for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background The use of research evidence to inform policy and practice cannot be overemphasized especially in low and middle-income countries (LMICs). To promote the use of research evidence in the provision of health services for enhanced effective control of communicable diseases in developing countries, the World Health Organization (WHO) in collaboration with the Health Policy Research Group (HPRG) commissioned a capacity development workshop in health economics among producers and users of research evidence in the healthcare system of Anambra state, south east Nigeria. This study was aimed to evaluate the impact of the workshop training on selected stakeholders on the use of health economics evidence to inform health policy and practice in the state. Methods Participants were purposively selected based either as producers and users of evidence at various levels of healthcare decision making in Anambra state, comprising mostly senior managers and executives from the ministry of health, the academic and health institutions in the state. A two-day capacity development workshop was conducted to train the participants on the use of economic evidence to inform health policy and practice. Pre-post test approach and group exercises were used to assess the knowledge and impact of the training exercises on the participants regarding the use of health economics evidence. Analysis was based on the framework of process-output-outcome-impact approach using the pre-post test and scores technique to assess the impact of the training programme. Results Pretest average scores varied from 39.7% to 60.5% while posttest scores varied from 47.6% to 65.7%, showing big differences in individual scores among participants, between the producers and users of evidence both prior to and after the training. The significant differences between the test scores indicated success in increasing the knowledge of participants on the use of health economics evidence. Results corroborated participants’ perceptions that the workshop impacted positively on their ability to apply the knowledge of health economic evidence to inform decision making in their respective practices. Conclusion Findings underscored the need for regular upgrade of stakeholders in the health system for enhanced uptake and sustainability of the programme to achieve the desired goal of getting research into policy and practice in the state applicable to other settings.

Despite decades of empirical research in the US and internationally documenting the benefits of implementing syringe services programs (SSPs), their implementation may be controversial in many jurisdictions. Better understanding how research evidence is applied during SSP implementation processes may enable the public health workforce to advocate for program scale up. This study explores applications of research evidence during processes to acquire approvals for SSP implementation in rural counties in Kentucky. In-depth interviews were conducted among eighteen stakeholders (e.g. health department directors, SSP operators) involved in SSP implementation in rural Kentucky counties. Stakeholders were asked to describe the contexts surrounding SSP implementation processes. Interviews were transcribed and analysed for applications of research evidence. Research evidence-related quotes were subsequently categorised based on the typologies for applications of research evidence developed by Weiss et al. (instrumental, conceptual, and symbolic) and a fourth category for instances when research evidence was not used. Instrumental applications of research evidence occurred at the intrapersonal and interpersonal levels to dispel concerns about SSPs and formed the basis for implementation support. SSP proponents used research evidence in a conceptual manner to address underlying attitudes and beliefs that were not evidence-based. Participants reported symbolic research evidence applications to justify pre-existing attitudes and beliefs about meeting the public health needs of people who inject drugs. Lastly, in some instances, research evidence was met with scepticism and an unwillingness to consider its merits. Applications of research evidence during SSP implementation approval processes in rural Kentucky counties were heterogeneous in nature. Better understanding the diversity of ways in which research evidence may be employed during SSP implementation processes may support efforts to improve the public health of people who inject drugs. Applications of research evidence during SSP implementation approval processes in rural Kentucky counties were heterogeneous in nature. Instrumental applications of research evidence occurred at the intrapersonal and interpersonal levels to dispel concerns about SSPs and formed the basis for implementation support. SSP proponents used research evidence in a conceptual manner to address underlying attitudes and beliefs that were not evidence-based. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic, debilitating disease affecting children worldwide. Several studies have shown the disease to be a significant problem which leads to a diminished quality of life (QoL) for the affected children, but systematic evaluation of such studies in Africa is yet to be reported. Therefore, this scoping review aims to map research evidence on children with AD and their QoL in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Methods: The scoping review will follow the Arksey and O’Mally methodological framework. The electronic databases to be searched will include PubMed, EBSCOhost (Academic Search Complete, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Health Sources), and Scopus and Google Scholar, for published literature between 2010 and 2021. The search strategy for the databases will include keywords, Medical Subject Headings terms, and Boolean operators. The reference list of the included sources of evidence and the WHO website will also be consulted for evidence relating to QoL of children with AD in SSA. Two independent reviewers will undertake abstract and full-text article screening with the guidance of eligibility criteria. This review will include studies conducted in SSA, and publications focusing on QoL and associated factors of AD in children. Data will be extracted from the included studies and analyzed qualitatively; NVIVO software V.11 will be used, and the emerging themes reported narratively. The mixed-method appraisal tool (MMAT) will be employed for quality appraisal of included studies. Discussion: We look forward to the findings of several studies that describe the QoL and associated factors among children with AD and that report on the use of different diagnostic criteria, severity scaling and QoL measuring scale tools used to ascertain the presence of AD, scale the severity of AD, and the impact of AD on QoL among children. This will help to improve clinical practice and the QoL of children with AD in SSA. The study findings will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal, peer presentations, and presentations at relevant conferences. Conclusion: This study will add new knowledge on the QoL in children with AD in the SSA context. The study has the potential to inform research and clinical practice to impact the QoL of children with AD in SSA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Teacher Education Research is the property of Teacher Education Research Editorial Office and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Abstract Background Public health professionals are expected to use the best available research and contextual evidence to inform decision-making. The National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools developed, implemented, and evaluated a Knowledge Broker mentoring program aimed at facilitating organization-wide evidence-informed decision-making in ten public health units in Ontario, Canada. The purpose of this study was to pragmatically assess the impact of the program. Methods A convergent mixed methods design was used to interpret quantitative results in the context of the qualitative findings. A goal-setting exercise was conducted with senior leadership in each organization prior to implementing the program. Achievement of goals was quantified through deductive coding of post-program interviews with participants and management. Interviews analyzed inductively to qualitatively explain progress toward identified goals and identify key factors related to implementation of EIDM within the organization. Results Organizations met their goals for evidence use to varying degrees. The key themes identified that support an organizational shift to EIDM include definitive plans for participants to share knowledge during and after program completion, embedding evidence into decision-making processes, and supportive leadership with organizational investment of time and resources. The location, setting, or size of health units was not associated with attainment of EIDM goals; small, rural health units were not at a disadvantage compared to larger, urban health units. Conclusions The Knowledge Broker mentoring program allowed participants to share their learning and support change at their health units. When paired with organizational supports such as supportive leadership and resource investment, this program holds promise as an innovative knowledge translation strategy for organization wide EIDM among public health organizations.

Maram Alakhras,1 Dana S Al-Mousa,1 Duaa Alwawi2 1Department of Allied Medical Sciences, Jordan University of Science and Technology, Irbid, Jordan; 2Department of Occupational Therapy, University of Jordan, Amman, JordanCorrespondence: Maram Alakhras, Tel +96227201000 Ext 26947, Email mmalakhras@just.edu.joPurpose: To evaluate radiologists’ education, knowledge and skills of research, attitude toward evidence-based radiology (EBR), understanding of terms and use of related published work in clinical practice and the association between these variables and sociodemographic characteristics. We also aim to assess the availability of resources and to identify sources and the main barriers to implementing EBR.Materials and Methods: A total of 87 radiologists completed a questionnaire, which consisted of eight sections related to radiologists’ demographic characteristics, and EBR-related questions. Descriptive statistics were used, and the association between EBR-related parts and sociodemographic characteristics was performed.Results: Ninety-three percent of the radiologists believed that EBR is necessary in practice. Only 40% received formal training in search strategies and 29.9% in critical appraisal of research literature during academic preparation. Moreover, 21– 62% of the respondents completely understand specific terms related to EBR. Sixty-three percent stated that they can access relevant databases and the Internet at workplace. Research articles were only used by 24% to make a clinical decision. Almost 50% reported that they read or reviewed ≤ 1 article per month. The primary barrier to implementing EBR was the lack of colleagues’ support. Understanding terms and the number of articles used in clinical decision were significantly related to education (P-value=0.001, 0.007) and hospital section (P-value=0.002, 0.027) respectively.Conclusion: Radiologists showed positive attitude toward EBR. However, there is a lack in information resources, colleagues’ support, use of published literature, understanding of research terms and the ability of radiologists to access relevant databases at workplaces.Graphical Abstract: Keywords: clinical decision, research evidence, evidence-based radiology

Background: The use of research evidence to inform policy and practice cannot be overemphasized especially in low and middle-income countries (LMICs). To promote the use of research evidence in the provision of health services for enhanced effective control of communicable diseases in developing countries, the World Health Organization (WHO) in collaboration with the Health Policy Research Group (HPRG) commissioned a capacity development workshop in health economics among producers and users of research evidence in the healthcare system of Anambra state, south east Nigeria. This study was aimed to evaluate the impact of the workshop training on selected stakeholders on the use of health economics evidence to inform health policy and practice in the state. Methods: Participants were purposively selected based either as producers and users of evidence at various levels of healthcare decision making in Anambra state, comprising mostly senior managers and executives from the ministry of health, the academic and health institutions in the state. A two-day capacity development workshop was conducted to train the participants on the use of economic evidence to inform health policy and practice. Pre-post test approach and group exercises were used to assess the knowledge and impact of the training exercises on the participants regarding the use of health economics evidence. Analysis was based on the framework of process-output-outcome-impact approach using the pre-post test and scores technique to assess the impact of the training programme. Results: Pretest average scores varied from 39.7% to 60.5% while posttest scores varied from 47.6% to 65.7%, showing big differences in individual scores among participants, between the producers and users of evidence both prior to and after the training. The significant differences between the test scores indicated success in increasing the knowledge of participants on the use of health economics evidence. Results corroborated participants' perceptions that the workshop impacted positively on their ability to apply the knowledge of health economic evidence to inform decision making in their respective practices. Conclusion: Findings underscored the need for regular upgrade of stakeholders in the health system for enhanced uptake and sustainability of the programme to achieve the desired goal of getting research into policy and practice in the state applicable to other settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background There is interest internationally in improving the uptake of research evidence to inform health care quality and safety. This article focusses on guidance development from research studies as one method for improving research uptake. While we recognise that implementation strategies on the ´demand´ side for encouraging the uptake of research are important, e.g. knowledge brokers and university-practice collaborations, this article focusses on the ´production´ aspect of how guidance development is reported and the consequent influence this may have on end-users´ receptivity to evidence, in addition to other demand-side processes. Main text The article considers the following question: how is guidance developed and what are the implications for reporting? We address this question by reviewing examples of guidance development reporting from applied health research studies, then describe how we produced guidance for a national study of evidence use in decision-making on adopting innovations. The starting point for reflecting on our experiences is a vignette of the guidance ´launch´ event at a national conference. Conclusions Implications for reporting guidance development and supporting improvement are discussed. These include the need to (a) produce reporting standards for the production of guidance to match reporting standards for other research methods, (b) acknowledge the ´informal´ or emergent aspects of producing guidance and its role within a wider knowledge mobilization strategy, (c) consider guidance development from projects as part of a wider knowledge mobilization strategy, and (d) encourage a receptive environment for guidance development and use, including researcher training, durable funding to support impact, and closer relations between research and practice.

Abstract Background Humanitarian action in crisis zones is fraught with many challenges, including lack of timely and accessible research evidence to inform decision-making about humanitarian interventions. Evidence websites have the potential to address this challenge. Evidence Aid is the only evidence website designed for crisis zones that focuses on providing research evidence in the form of systematic reviews. The objective of this study is to explore stakeholders’ views of Evidence Aid, contributing further to our understanding of the use of research evidence in decision-making in crisis zones. Methods We designed a qualitative user-testing study to collect interview data from stakeholders about their impressions of Evidence Aid. Eligible stakeholders included those with and without previous experience of Evidence Aid. All participants were either currently working or have worked within the last year in a crisis zone. Participants were asked to perform the same user experience-related tasks and answer questions about this experience and their knowledge needs. Data were analysed using a deductive framework analysis approach drawing on Morville’s seven facets of the user experience — findability, usability, usefulness, desirability, accessibility, credibility and value. Results A total of 31 interviews were completed with senior decision-makers (n = 8), advisors (n = 7), field managers (n = 7), analysts/researchers (n = 5) and healthcare providers (n = 4). Participant self-reported knowledge needs varied depending on their role. Overall, participants did not identify any ‘major’ problems (highest order) and identified only two ‘big’ problems (second highest order) with using the Evidence Aid website, namely the lack of a search engine on the home page and that some full-text articles linked to/from the site require a payment. Participants identified seven specific suggestions about how to improve Evidence Aid, many of which can also be applied to other evidence websites. Conclusions Stakeholders in crisis zones found Evidence Aid to be useful, accessible and credible. However, they experienced some problems with the lack of a search engine on the home page and the requirement for payment for some full-text articles linked to/from the site.

Background: Social media use has potential to facilitate the rapid dissemination of research evidence to busy health and social care practitioners., Objective: This study aims to quantitatively synthesize evidence of the between- and within-group effectiveness of social media for dissemination of research evidence to health and social care practitioners. It also compared effectiveness between different social media platforms, formats, and strategies., Methods: We searched electronic databases for articles in English that were published between January 1, 2010, and January 10, 2023, and that evaluated social media interventions for disseminating research evidence to qualified, postregistration health and social care practitioners in measures of reach, engagement, direct dissemination, or impact. Screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessments were carried out by at least 2 independent reviewers. Meta-analyses of standardized pooled effects were carried out for between- and within-group effectiveness of social media and comparisons between platforms, formats, and strategies. Certainty of evidence for outcomes was assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) framework., Results: In total, 50 mixed-quality articles that were heterogeneous in design and outcome were included (n=9, 18% were randomized controlled trials [RCTs]). Reach (measured in number of practitioners, impressions, or post views) was reported in 26 studies. Engagement (measured in likes or post interactions) was evaluated in 21 studies. Direct dissemination (measured in link clicks, article views, downloads, or altmetric attention score) was analyzed in 23 studies (8 RCTs). Impact (measured in citations or measures of thinking and practice) was reported in 13 studies. Included studies almost universally indicated effects in favor of social media interventions, although effect sizes varied. Cumulative evidence indicated moderate certainty of large and moderate between-group effects of social media interventions on direct dissemination (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.88; P=.02) and impact (SMD 0.76; P<.001). After social media interventions, cumulative evidence showed moderate certainty of large within-group effects on reach (SMD 1.99; P<.001), engagement (SMD 3.74; P<.001), and direct dissemination (SMD 0.82; P=.004) and low certainty of a small within-group effect on impacting thinking or practice (SMD 0.45; P=.02). There was also evidence for the effectiveness of using multiple social media platforms (including Twitter, subsequently rebranded X; and Facebook), images (particularly infographics), and intensive social media strategies with frequent, daily posts and involving influential others. No included studies tested the dissemination of research evidence to social care practitioners., Conclusions: Social media was effective for disseminating research evidence to health care practitioners. More intense social media campaigns using specific platforms, formats, and strategies may be more effective than less intense interventions. Implications include recommendations for effective dissemination of research evidence to health care practitioners and further RCTs in this field, particularly investigating the dissemination of social care research., Trial Registration: PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42022378793; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display&#95;record.php?RecordID=378793., International Registered Report Identifier (irrid): RR2-10.2196/45684., (©Sarah Roberts-Lewis, Helen Baxter, Gill Mein, Sophia Quirke-McFarlane, Fiona J Leggat, Hannah Garner, Martha Powell, Sarah White, Lindsay Bearne. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 05.06.2024.)

In the article, the authors discusses evidence-based medicine (EBM) and evidence-based practice (EBP) in health care and how can chiropractors reconcile their experiences with research evidence. Topics include a comparison of research evidence and clinical evidence, as well as some kinds of evidence like randomized controlled trials, meta-analysis, and systematic reviews.

Criminologists are often frustrated by the disconnect between sound empirical research and public policy initiatives. Recently, there have been several attempts to better connect research evidence and public policy. While these new strategies may well bear fruit, I believe the challenge is largely an intellectual one. Ideas and research evidence must guide public policy and practice. In this article, I present highlights from my tenure as the Director of the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), the research, development, and evaluation agency in the Department of Justice. One of the ideas that I emphasized at NIJ was "Translational Criminology." I believe translational criminology acknowledges NIJ's unique mission to facilitate rigorous research that is relevant to the practice and policy. I also discuss the challenges I faced in bringing research to bear on public policy and practice. I end with a call for my colleagues in criminology and criminal justice to become more involved in government. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Evidence based medicine (EBM) is the integration of best research evidence with clinical expertise and patient values. In the practice of EBM it is the physician’s duty to find the best and most current information and apply it judiciously for the benefit of the patient. The practice of EBM involves formulating a clear clinical question from a patient’s problem, searching the literature to acquire the evidence, then critically appraising the evidence for its validity and usefulness, and applying the results by implementing useful findings into clinical practice, and finally evaluating this application of evidence on patient. An important rule in EBM is that it starts with the patient and ends with the patient. Evidence based medicine requires new skills of the physician, including efficient literature searching and the application of formal rules of evidence evaluation from the clinical literature. Incorporation of EBM into one’s practice will not only make one a better clinician, it also allows one to provide the best possible quality of medical care to his or her patients. Thus EBM can be incorporated as an integral part of the medical curriculum.

Following recent global stakeholder configurations, policy frameworks and strife for multi-levelled and agency policy coherence within the Sport for Development and Peace sector, the Kazan Action Plan (2017) calls for evidence-informed decision-making though building a case for sport in playing a part in sustainable development as envisaged by the UN Sustainable Development Goals. As Sport and Recreation South Africa is in the process of updating the 2009 Case for Sport and Recreation document it is deemed timely that academic discourse of evidence production should be addressed. This paper provides a synopsis of robust evidence around the social impact of sport relating to global strategic imperatives emanating for UN agencies (particularly UNICEF and UNESCO), regional and national public sport structures. Contextual realities further present a filter for relevant data and arguments to capture a meaningful body of knowledge from which decision-makers can draw significant insights. The social role of sport within national government priorities in South Africa features phenomena related to nation-building, cohesion and social transformation with relevance to the 'panacea proposition' of sport. The methodological rigor, critical scrutiny, programme theories and the complexity of layering realities should drive the profiling of an evidence base that would also serve a decolonised approach towards theory-building. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Values are at the heart of discussions related to policy-making and any kind of reforms in health systems. Despite wide recognition of its importance, the concept of value is still vague and the policy-making processes remain astray with respect to values. This study aims to provide a model of value-based policy-making and to explain the concept value and how it affects policy-making. Methods: The main question of the current study is to explain the concept of value-based policy-making and developing a model, based on the explained concept. In this line, critical review method and Carnwell and Daly approach and using particular keywords related to stewardship, and searching databases were used. In the initial search, 739 studies were obtained, of which using targeted sampling method, 11 studies were finally selected. Then, in order to design and explain different aspects of the value concept in the health system and to develop a model, selected studies were criticized, and finally, the conceptual model of value is designed and explained. Results: The concept of value and its effects, dimensions and its relation to principles, evidence and criteria were determined at different stages of the policy-making process. It was also revealed that value-based policy-making in a health system is contingent upon the realization of terminal values. Conclusions: In the process of selecting the best policy option, it is necessary to identify the relationship between terminal, instrumental, criterion, and evidence to avoid deviating from the reference value framework in any country and to avoid blindly imitating other experiences in other countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background The interrelationships between research evidence and policy-making are complex. Different theoretical frameworks exist to explain general evidence–policy interactions. One largely unexplored element of these interrelationships is how evidence interrelates with, and influences, policy/political agenda-setting. This review aims to identify the elements and processes of theories, frameworks and models on interrelationships of research evidence and health policy-making, with a focus on actionability and agenda-setting in the context of mental health in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods A systematic review of theories was conducted based on the BeHeMOTh search method, using a tested and refined search strategy. Nine electronic databases and other relevant sources were searched for peer-reviewed and grey literature. Two reviewers screened the abstracts, reviewed full-text articles, extracted data and performed quality assessments. Analysis was based on a thematic analysis. The included papers had to present an actionable theoretical framework/model on evidence and policy interrelationships, such as knowledge translation or evidence-based policy, specifically target the agenda-setting process, focus on mental health, be from LMICs and published in English. Results From 236 publications included in the full text analysis, no studies fully complied with our inclusion criteria. Widening the focus by leaving out ‘agenda-setting’, we included ten studies, four of which had unique conceptual frameworks focusing on mental health and LMICs but not agenda-setting. The four analysed frameworks confirmed research gaps from LMICs and mental health, and a lack of focus on agenda-setting. Frameworks and models from other health and policy areas provide interesting conceptual approaches and lessons with regards to agenda-setting. Conclusion Our systematic review identified frameworks on evidence and policy interrelations that differ in their elements and processes. No framework fulfilled all inclusion criteria. Four actionable frameworks are applicable to mental health and LMICs, but none specifically target agenda-setting. We have identified agenda-setting as a research theory gap in the context of mental health knowledge translation in LMICs. Frameworks from other health/policy areas could offer lessons on agenda-setting and new approaches for creating policy impact for mental health and to tackle the translational gap in LMICs.

Summary: Government and parliamentary inquiries into child protection have historically exerted a significant impact on policy and practice reform. Yet to date, there has been no analysis of the impact of such inquiries on programme and service supports for young people transitioning from out-of-home care (often termed leaving care). This article uses a content analysis methodology to critically examine and compare the findings of six recent Australian child protection inquiries (five at state and territory level and one Commonwealth) in relation to their discrete sections on leaving care. Attention is drawn to how the policy issue is framed including key terminology, the major concerns identified, the local and international research evidence cited and the principal sources of information including whether or not priority is given to the lived experience of care leavers. Findings: All six inquiries identified major limitations in leaving care legislation, policy and practice including poor outcomes in key areas such as housing, education and employment. There was a consensus that post-18 assistance should be expanded, and most of the reports agreed that greater attention should be paid to the specific cultural needs of the large number of Indigenous care leavers. Applications: Care leavers universally are a vulnerable group; leaving care policy should be informed by the lived experience and expertise of care leavers; governments have a responsibility to provide ongoing supports beyond 18 years of age, particularly in areas such as housing and education, training and employment [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is attracting a great deal of attention and it is important to investigate the public perceptions of AI and their impact on the perceived credibility of research evidence. In the literature, there is evidence that people overweight research evidence when framed in neuroscience findings. In this paper, we present the findings of the first investigation of the impact of an AI frame on the perceived credibility of educational research evidence. In an experimental study, we allocated 605 participants including educators to one of three conditions in which the same educational research evidence was framed within one of: AI, neuroscience, or educational psychology. The results demonstrate that when educational research evidence is framed within AI research, it is considered as less credible in comparison to when it is framed instead within neuroscience or educational psychology. The effect is still evident when the subjects' familiarity with the framing discipline is controlled for. Furthermore, our results indicate that the general public perceives AI to be: less helpful in assisting us to understand how children learn, lacking in adherence to scientific methods, and to be less prestigious compared to neuroscience and educational psychology. Considering the increased use of AI technologies in Educational settings, we argue that there should be significant attempts to recover the public image of AI being less scientifically robust and less prestigious than educational psychology and neuroscience. We conclude the article suggesting that AI in Education community should attempt to be more actively engaged with key stakeholders of AI and Education to help mitigate such effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]