Cargando…

Translating evidence into practice: the role of health research funders

BACKGROUND: A growing body of work on knowledge translation (KT) reveals significant gaps between what is known to improve health, and what is done to improve health. The literature and practice also suggest that KT has the potential to narrow those gaps, leading to more evidence-informed healthcare...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Holmes, Bev, Scarrow, Gayle, Schellenberg, Megan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3420241/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22531033
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-7-39
_version_ 1782240819316523008
author Holmes, Bev
Scarrow, Gayle
Schellenberg, Megan
author_facet Holmes, Bev
Scarrow, Gayle
Schellenberg, Megan
author_sort Holmes, Bev
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: A growing body of work on knowledge translation (KT) reveals significant gaps between what is known to improve health, and what is done to improve health. The literature and practice also suggest that KT has the potential to narrow those gaps, leading to more evidence-informed healthcare. In response, Canadian health research funders and agencies have made KT a priority. This article describes how one funding agency determined its KT role and in the process developed a model that other agencies could use when considering KT programs. DISCUSSION: While ‘excellence’ is an important criterion by which to evaluate and fund health research, it alone does not ensure relevance to societal health priorities. There is increased demand for return on investments in health research in the form of societal and health system benefits. Canadian health research funding agencies are responding to these demands by emphasizing relevance as a funding criterion and supporting researchers and research users to use the evidence generated. Based on recommendations from the literature, an environmental scan, broad circulation of an iterative discussion paper, and an expert working group process, our agency developed a plan to maximize our role in KT. Key to the process was development of a model comprising five key functional areas that together create the conditions for effective KT: advancing KT science; building KT capacity; managing KT projects; funding KT activities; and advocating for KT. Observations made during the planning process of relevance to the KT enterprise are: the importance of delineating KT and communications, and information and knowledge; determining responsibility for KT; supporting implementation and evaluation; and promoting the message that both research and KT take time to realize results. SUMMARY: Challenges exist in fulfilling expectations that research evidence results in beneficial impacts for society. However, health agencies are well placed to help maximize the use of evidence in health practice and policy. We propose five key functional areas of KT for health agencies, and encourage partnerships and discussion to advance the field.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3420241
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-34202412012-08-17 Translating evidence into practice: the role of health research funders Holmes, Bev Scarrow, Gayle Schellenberg, Megan Implement Sci Debate BACKGROUND: A growing body of work on knowledge translation (KT) reveals significant gaps between what is known to improve health, and what is done to improve health. The literature and practice also suggest that KT has the potential to narrow those gaps, leading to more evidence-informed healthcare. In response, Canadian health research funders and agencies have made KT a priority. This article describes how one funding agency determined its KT role and in the process developed a model that other agencies could use when considering KT programs. DISCUSSION: While ‘excellence’ is an important criterion by which to evaluate and fund health research, it alone does not ensure relevance to societal health priorities. There is increased demand for return on investments in health research in the form of societal and health system benefits. Canadian health research funding agencies are responding to these demands by emphasizing relevance as a funding criterion and supporting researchers and research users to use the evidence generated. Based on recommendations from the literature, an environmental scan, broad circulation of an iterative discussion paper, and an expert working group process, our agency developed a plan to maximize our role in KT. Key to the process was development of a model comprising five key functional areas that together create the conditions for effective KT: advancing KT science; building KT capacity; managing KT projects; funding KT activities; and advocating for KT. Observations made during the planning process of relevance to the KT enterprise are: the importance of delineating KT and communications, and information and knowledge; determining responsibility for KT; supporting implementation and evaluation; and promoting the message that both research and KT take time to realize results. SUMMARY: Challenges exist in fulfilling expectations that research evidence results in beneficial impacts for society. However, health agencies are well placed to help maximize the use of evidence in health practice and policy. We propose five key functional areas of KT for health agencies, and encourage partnerships and discussion to advance the field. BioMed Central 2012-04-24 /pmc/articles/PMC3420241/ /pubmed/22531033 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-7-39 Text en Copyright ©2012 Holmes et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Debate
Holmes, Bev
Scarrow, Gayle
Schellenberg, Megan
Translating evidence into practice: the role of health research funders
title Translating evidence into practice: the role of health research funders
title_full Translating evidence into practice: the role of health research funders
title_fullStr Translating evidence into practice: the role of health research funders
title_full_unstemmed Translating evidence into practice: the role of health research funders
title_short Translating evidence into practice: the role of health research funders
title_sort translating evidence into practice: the role of health research funders
topic Debate
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3420241/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22531033
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-7-39
work_keys_str_mv AT holmesbev translatingevidenceintopracticetheroleofhealthresearchfunders
AT scarrowgayle translatingevidenceintopracticetheroleofhealthresearchfunders
AT schellenbergmegan translatingevidenceintopracticetheroleofhealthresearchfunders