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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Uphold, Heatherlun S., Drahota, Amy, Bustos, Tatiana E., Crawford, Mary Katherine, Buchalski, Zachary
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