Cargando…

How research funding agencies support science integration into policy and practice: An international overview

BACKGROUND: Funding agencies constitute one essential pillar for policy makers, researchers and health service delivery institutions. Such agencies are increasingly providing support for science implementation. In this paper, we investigate health research funding agencies and how they support the i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Smits, Pernelle A, Denis, Jean-Louis
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3939639/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24565209
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-9-28
_version_ 1782305721733349376
author Smits, Pernelle A
Denis, Jean-Louis
author_facet Smits, Pernelle A
Denis, Jean-Louis
author_sort Smits, Pernelle A
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Funding agencies constitute one essential pillar for policy makers, researchers and health service delivery institutions. Such agencies are increasingly providing support for science implementation. In this paper, we investigate health research funding agencies and how they support the integration of science into policy, and of science into practice, and vice versa. METHODS: We selected six countries: Australia, The Netherlands, France, Canada, England and the United States. For 13 funding agencies, we compared their intentions to support, their actions related to science integration into policy and practice, and the reported benefits of this integration. We did a qualitative content analysis of the reports and information provided on the funding agencies’ websites. RESULTS: Most funding agencies emphasized the importance of science integration into policy and practice in their strategic orientation, and stated how this integration was structured. Their funding activities were embedded in the push, pull, or linkage/exchange knowledge transfer model. However, few program funding efforts were based on all three models. The agencies reported more often on the benefits of integration on practice, rather than on policy. External programs that were funded largely covered science integration into policy and practice at the end of grant stage, while overlooking the initial stages. Finally, external funding actions were more prominent than internally initiated bridging activities and training activities on such integration. CONCLUSIONS: This paper contributes to research on science implementation because it goes beyond the two community model of researchers versus end users, to include funding agencies. Users of knowledge may be end users in health organizations like hospitals; civil servants assigned to decision making positions within funding agencies; civil servants outside of the Ministry of Health, such as the Ministry of the Environment; politicians deciding on health-related legislation; or even university researchers whose work builds on previous research. This heterogeneous sample of users may require different user-specific mechanisms for research initiation, development and dissemination. This paper builds the foundation for further discussion on science implementation from the perspective of funding agencies in the health field. In general, case studies can help in identifying best practices for evidence-informed decision making.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3939639
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-39396392014-03-04 How research funding agencies support science integration into policy and practice: An international overview Smits, Pernelle A Denis, Jean-Louis Implement Sci Research BACKGROUND: Funding agencies constitute one essential pillar for policy makers, researchers and health service delivery institutions. Such agencies are increasingly providing support for science implementation. In this paper, we investigate health research funding agencies and how they support the integration of science into policy, and of science into practice, and vice versa. METHODS: We selected six countries: Australia, The Netherlands, France, Canada, England and the United States. For 13 funding agencies, we compared their intentions to support, their actions related to science integration into policy and practice, and the reported benefits of this integration. We did a qualitative content analysis of the reports and information provided on the funding agencies’ websites. RESULTS: Most funding agencies emphasized the importance of science integration into policy and practice in their strategic orientation, and stated how this integration was structured. Their funding activities were embedded in the push, pull, or linkage/exchange knowledge transfer model. However, few program funding efforts were based on all three models. The agencies reported more often on the benefits of integration on practice, rather than on policy. External programs that were funded largely covered science integration into policy and practice at the end of grant stage, while overlooking the initial stages. Finally, external funding actions were more prominent than internally initiated bridging activities and training activities on such integration. CONCLUSIONS: This paper contributes to research on science implementation because it goes beyond the two community model of researchers versus end users, to include funding agencies. Users of knowledge may be end users in health organizations like hospitals; civil servants assigned to decision making positions within funding agencies; civil servants outside of the Ministry of Health, such as the Ministry of the Environment; politicians deciding on health-related legislation; or even university researchers whose work builds on previous research. This heterogeneous sample of users may require different user-specific mechanisms for research initiation, development and dissemination. This paper builds the foundation for further discussion on science implementation from the perspective of funding agencies in the health field. In general, case studies can help in identifying best practices for evidence-informed decision making. BioMed Central 2014-02-24 /pmc/articles/PMC3939639/ /pubmed/24565209 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-9-28 Text en Copyright © 2014 Smits and Denis; 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 credited.
spellingShingle Research
Smits, Pernelle A
Denis, Jean-Louis
How research funding agencies support science integration into policy and practice: An international overview
title How research funding agencies support science integration into policy and practice: An international overview
title_full How research funding agencies support science integration into policy and practice: An international overview
title_fullStr How research funding agencies support science integration into policy and practice: An international overview
title_full_unstemmed How research funding agencies support science integration into policy and practice: An international overview
title_short How research funding agencies support science integration into policy and practice: An international overview
title_sort how research funding agencies support science integration into policy and practice: an international overview
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3939639/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24565209
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-9-28
work_keys_str_mv AT smitspernellea howresearchfundingagenciessupportscienceintegrationintopolicyandpracticeaninternationaloverview
AT denisjeanlouis howresearchfundingagenciessupportscienceintegrationintopolicyandpracticeaninternationaloverview