Cargando…
“There’s no money in community dissemination”: A mixed methods analysis of researcher dissemination-as-usual
BACKGROUND: The field of dissemination and implementation science has the potential to narrow the translational research-to-practice gap and improve the use of evidence-based practices (EBPs) within community-based settings. Yet, foundational research related to dissemination efforts, such as unders...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Cambridge University Press
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9453578/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36128339 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2022.437 |
_version_ | 1784785175699259392 |
---|---|
author | Uphold, Heatherlun S. Drahota, Amy Bustos, Tatiana E. Crawford, Mary Katherine Buchalski, Zachary |
author_facet | Uphold, Heatherlun S. Drahota, Amy Bustos, Tatiana E. Crawford, Mary Katherine Buchalski, Zachary |
author_sort | Uphold, Heatherlun S. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The field of dissemination and implementation science has the potential to narrow the translational research-to-practice gap and improve the use of evidence-based practices (EBPs) within community-based settings. Yet, foundational research related to dissemination efforts, such as understanding researcher attitudes, practices, and the determinants to sharing research findings, is lacking within extant literature. METHODS: A sequential explanatory (QUAN [Image: see text] qual) mixed methods design was used to examine 85 academic researchers’ perspectives and self-reported dissemination methods used to share research outcomes with community stakeholders to better understand researcher’s usual dissemination practices (referred to as dissemination-as-usual). Quantitative surveys collected researcher demographic data, attitudes toward dissemination efforts, and dissemination strategy use. RESULTS: Multiple linear regression examined predictors of the quantity of dissemination strategies utilized by researchers, finding that years since earning their degree, time spent disseminating, and the number of reasons for engaging in dissemination efforts predicted greater numbers of dissemination strategies utilized by researchers. Individual, semi-structured interviews with a subset of researchers (n = 18) expanded upon quantitative findings, identifying barriers and facilitators to their dissemination efforts. Data strands were integrated using a joint display, and the Dissemination of Research model guided data interpretation. More established researchers experienced fewer barriers and more facilitators to support their use of a variety of dissemination strategies to share findings with community stakeholders. However, researchers reported needing specific training, institutional support, and/or dedicated time to plan and enact dissemination strategies. CONCLUSION: The necessary first step in research translation is the dissemination of research evidence, and understanding dissemination-as-usual can identify areas of need to advance translational science. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9453578 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Cambridge University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-94535782022-09-19 “There’s no money in community dissemination”: A mixed methods analysis of researcher dissemination-as-usual Uphold, Heatherlun S. Drahota, Amy Bustos, Tatiana E. Crawford, Mary Katherine Buchalski, Zachary J Clin Transl Sci Research Article BACKGROUND: The field of dissemination and implementation science has the potential to narrow the translational research-to-practice gap and improve the use of evidence-based practices (EBPs) within community-based settings. Yet, foundational research related to dissemination efforts, such as understanding researcher attitudes, practices, and the determinants to sharing research findings, is lacking within extant literature. METHODS: A sequential explanatory (QUAN [Image: see text] qual) mixed methods design was used to examine 85 academic researchers’ perspectives and self-reported dissemination methods used to share research outcomes with community stakeholders to better understand researcher’s usual dissemination practices (referred to as dissemination-as-usual). Quantitative surveys collected researcher demographic data, attitudes toward dissemination efforts, and dissemination strategy use. RESULTS: Multiple linear regression examined predictors of the quantity of dissemination strategies utilized by researchers, finding that years since earning their degree, time spent disseminating, and the number of reasons for engaging in dissemination efforts predicted greater numbers of dissemination strategies utilized by researchers. Individual, semi-structured interviews with a subset of researchers (n = 18) expanded upon quantitative findings, identifying barriers and facilitators to their dissemination efforts. Data strands were integrated using a joint display, and the Dissemination of Research model guided data interpretation. More established researchers experienced fewer barriers and more facilitators to support their use of a variety of dissemination strategies to share findings with community stakeholders. However, researchers reported needing specific training, institutional support, and/or dedicated time to plan and enact dissemination strategies. CONCLUSION: The necessary first step in research translation is the dissemination of research evidence, and understanding dissemination-as-usual can identify areas of need to advance translational science. Cambridge University Press 2022-08-01 /pmc/articles/PMC9453578/ /pubmed/36128339 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2022.437 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Uphold, Heatherlun S. Drahota, Amy Bustos, Tatiana E. Crawford, Mary Katherine Buchalski, Zachary “There’s no money in community dissemination”: A mixed methods analysis of researcher dissemination-as-usual |
title | “There’s no money in community dissemination”: A mixed methods analysis of researcher dissemination-as-usual |
title_full | “There’s no money in community dissemination”: A mixed methods analysis of researcher dissemination-as-usual |
title_fullStr | “There’s no money in community dissemination”: A mixed methods analysis of researcher dissemination-as-usual |
title_full_unstemmed | “There’s no money in community dissemination”: A mixed methods analysis of researcher dissemination-as-usual |
title_short | “There’s no money in community dissemination”: A mixed methods analysis of researcher dissemination-as-usual |
title_sort | “there’s no money in community dissemination”: a mixed methods analysis of researcher dissemination-as-usual |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9453578/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36128339 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2022.437 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT upholdheatherluns theresnomoneyincommunitydisseminationamixedmethodsanalysisofresearcherdisseminationasusual AT drahotaamy theresnomoneyincommunitydisseminationamixedmethodsanalysisofresearcherdisseminationasusual AT bustostatianae theresnomoneyincommunitydisseminationamixedmethodsanalysisofresearcherdisseminationasusual AT crawfordmarykatherine theresnomoneyincommunitydisseminationamixedmethodsanalysisofresearcherdisseminationasusual AT buchalskizachary theresnomoneyincommunitydisseminationamixedmethodsanalysisofresearcherdisseminationasusual |