Excerpts taken from the book: Knowledge Translation in Health Care: Moving from Evidence to Practice. (Straus, Sharon E., y Ian D. Graham. 2009. Ed. John Wiley and Sons). In the United Kingdom and Europe, the terms implementation science and research utilization are commonly used in this context. In the United States, the terms dissemination and diffusion, research use, knowledge transfer, and uptake are often used. Canada commonly uses the terms knowledge transfer and exchange. [p.19]
The knowledge-to-action cycle prescribes the need to identify studies, research, synthesis, and knowledge tools comprising the knowledge creation funnel, as well as the need to identify literature on the KT process [p.60]
Key ideas about Knowledge Translation [KT]:
- Improving the link between research and decision making
[p.12]
- It is clear that knowledge creation, distillation, and dissemination are not sufficient on their own to ensure implementation in decision-making. [p.20 ]
- Failure to use research evidence to inform decision-making is apparent across all key decision-maker groups [p.20]
- Global evidence should be considered the basic unit of knowledge translation [p.30]
- The process by which knowledge is implemented. [p.71]
- Knowledge management is necessary, but is insufficient to ensure effective KT [p.21]
Current concern with evidence-based decision making (EBDM) is about improving the quantity, quality, and breadth of evidence used by all participants in the health care system: legislators, administrators, practitioners, industry, and, increasingly, the public.
[p.12]
IV elements in a campaign to achieve this improvement:
- An umbrella message from a national level that communicates a cultural change toward more conduct of relevant, good quality research and greater attention to the application of findings from such research to decision making.
- New structures to improve the opportunities for ongoing fruitful communication between researchers and decision makers, and to concentrate both applied research production and research receptor skills as a critical mass in universities and decision-making organizations, respectively.
- New activities and processes:
- i. By researchers to synthesize and disseminate their work in a way that is more sensitive to the needs of their target audiences,
- ii. By decision makers to both receive and apply research findings, as well as to communicate audience-specific priorities,
- iii. By universities to reward instead of penalize employees interested in applied research, and
- iv. By research sponsors to both encourage greater relevance in funded research and to recognize issue-specific bodies of knowledge as an important unit of research production and transfer.
The knowledge-to-action cycle prescribes the need to identify studies, research, synthesis, and knowledge tools comprising the knowledge creation funnel, as well as the need to identify literature on the KT process [p.60]
In this model, the knowledge-to-action process is iterative, dynamic, and complex, concerning both knowledge creation and application (action cycle) with fluid boundaries between creation and action components.
[p.22]
First-generation knowledge is derived from primary studies such as randomized trials and interrupted time series. Knowledge synthesis is second-generation knowledge. Third-generation knowledge includes tools and products such as decision aids and educational modules. Their purpose is to present knowledge in user-friendly, implementable formats,
[p.27]
Ensuring that the appropriate stakeholders are involved is a key strategy to facilitate successful guideline development and implementation.
[p.50]
