Background Public health professionals are expected to use the best available research and contextual evidence to inform decision-making. The National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools developed, implemented, and evaluated a Knowledge Broker mentoring program aimed at facilitating organization-wide evidence-informed decision-making in ten public health units in Ontario, Canada. The purpose of this study was to pragmatically assess the impact of the program. Methods A convergent mixed methods design was used to interpret quantitative results in the context of the qualitative findings. A goal-setting exercise was conducted with senior leadership in each organization prior to implementing the program. Achievement of goals was quantified through deductive coding of post-program interviews with participants and management. Interviews analyzed inductively to qualitatively explain progress toward identified goals and identify key factors related to implementation of EIDM within the organization. Results Organizations met their goals for evidence use to varying degrees. The key themes identified that support an organizational shift to EIDM include definitive plans for participants to share knowledge during and after program completion, embedding evidence into decision-making processes, and supportive leadership with organizational investment of time and resources. The location, setting, or size of health units was not associated with attainment of EIDM goals; small, rural health units were not at a disadvantage compared to larger, urban health units. Conclusions The Knowledge Broker mentoring program allowed participants to share their learning and support change at their health units. When paired with organizational supports such as supportive leadership and resource investment, this program holds promise as an innovative knowledge translation strategy for organization wide EIDM among public health organizations.
Background: Public health professionals are expected to use the best available research and contextual evidence to inform decision making. The National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools developed, implemented, and evaluated a Knowledge Broker mentoring program aimed at facilitating organization-wide evidence-informed decision making in ten public health units in Ontario, Canada. The purpose of this study was to pragmatically assess the impact of the program. Methods: A convergent mixed methods design was used to interpret quantitative results in the context of the qualitative findings. Quantitatively, participants’ knowledge and skills for finding, interpreting, and using evidence were measured before and after program completion via multiple-choice tests. Changes in scores were assessed using paired t-tests. Qualitatively, program participants and management at enrolled public health units were interviewed to explore the effect of program participation. A secondary analysis of these interviews was conducted to determine whether organizations met their evidence use goals set at baseline, and to identify key factors related to implementation of EIDM within the organization. Results: Post-program scores for knowledge and skills for EIDM were higher compared to pre-program scores (mean difference = 14.0%, 95% CI 8.2%, 19.8%). Organizations met their goals for evidence use to varying degrees. Key themes identified that support an organizational shift to EIDM include definitive plans for participants to share knowledge during and after program completion, embedding evidence into decision making processes, and supportive leadership with organizational investment of time and resources. The location, setting or size of health units was not associated with attainment of EIDM goals; small, rural health units were not at a disadvantage compared to larger, urban health units. Conclusions: The Knowledge Broker mentoring program effectively increased participants’ knowledge and skill, allowing them to share their learning and support change at their health units. When paired with organizational supports such as supportive leadership and resource investment, this program holds promise as an innovative knowledge translation strategy for organization wide EIDM among public health organizations.
BACKGROUND True evidence-informed decision making in public health relies on incorporating evidence from a number of sources in addition to traditional scientific evidence. Lack of access to these types of data, as well as ease of use and interpretability of scientific evidence contribute to limited uptake of evidence-informed decision making in practice. An electronic evidence system that includes multiple sources of evidence and potentially novel computational processing approaches or artificial intelligence holds promise as a solution to overcoming barriers to evidence-informed decision making in public health. OBJECTIVE To understand the needs and preferences for an electronic evidence system among public health professionals in Canada. METHODS An invitation to participate in an anonymous online survey was distributed via listservs of two Canadian public health organizations. Eligible participants were English or French speaking individuals currently working in public health. The survey contained both multiple choice and open-ended questions about needs and preferences relevant to an electronic evidence system. Quantitative responses were analyzed to explore differences by public health role. Inductive and deductive analysis methods were used to code and interpret the qualitative data. Ethics review was not required by the host institution. RESULTS Respondents (n = 371) were heterogeneous, spanning organizations, positions, and areas of practice within public health. Nearly all (98.0%) respondents indicated that an electronic evidence system would support their work. Respondents had high preferences for local contextual data, research and intervention evidence, and information about human and financial resources. Qualitative analyses identified a number of concerns, needs, and suggestions for development of such a system. Concerns ranged from personal use of such a system, to the ability of their organization to use such a system. Identified needs spanned the different sources of evidence including local context, research and intervention evidence, and resources and tools. Additional suggestions were identified to improve system usability. CONCLUSIONS Canadian public health professionals have positive perceptions towards an electronic evidence system that would bring together evidence from the local context, scientific research, and resources. Elements were also identified to increase the usability of an electronic evidence system.
Background True evidence-informed decision-making in public health relies on incorporating evidence from a number of sources in addition to traditional scientific evidence. Lack of access to these types of data as well as ease of use and interpretability of scientific evidence contribute to limited uptake of evidence-informed decision-making in practice. An electronic evidence system that includes multiple sources of evidence and potentially novel computational processing approaches or artificial intelligence holds promise as a solution to overcoming barriers to evidence-informed decision-making in public health. Objective This study aims to understand the needs and preferences for an electronic evidence system among public health professionals in Canada. Methods An invitation to participate in an anonymous web-based survey was distributed via listservs of 2 Canadian public health organizations in February 2019. Eligible participants were English- or French-speaking individuals currently working in public health. The survey contained both multiple-choice and open-ended questions about the needs and preferences relevant to an electronic evidence system. Quantitative responses were analyzed to explore differences by public health role. Inductive and deductive analysis methods were used to code and interpret the qualitative data. Ethics review was not required by the host institution. Results Respondents (N=371) were heterogeneous, spanning organizations, positions, and areas of practice within public health. Nearly all (364/371, 98.1%) respondents indicated that an electronic evidence system would support their work. Respondents had high preferences for local contextual data, research and intervention evidence, and information about human and financial resources. Qualitative analyses identified several concerns, needs, and suggestions for the development of such a system. Concerns ranged from the personal use of such a system to the ability of their organization to use such a system. Recognized needs spanned the different sources of evidence, including local context, research and intervention evidence, and resources and tools. Additional suggestions were identified to improve system usability. Conclusions Canadian public health professionals have positive perceptions toward an electronic evidence system that would bring together evidence from the local context, scientific research, and resources. Elements were also identified to increase the usability of an electronic evidence system.
Background: Public health professionals are expected to use the best available research and contextual evidence to inform decision making. The National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools developed, implemented, and evaluated a Knowledge Broker mentoring program aimed at facilitating organization-wide evidence-informed decision making in ten public health units in Ontario, Canada. The purpose of this study was to pragmatically assess the impact of the program.Methods: A convergent mixed methods design was used to interpret quantitative results in the context of the qualitative findings. Quantitatively, participants’ knowledge and skills for finding, interpreting, and using evidence were measured before and after program completion via multiple-choice tests. Changes in scores were assessed using paired t-tests. Qualitatively, program participants and management at enrolled public health units were interviewed to explore the effect of program participation. A secondary analysis of these interviews was conducted to determine whether organizations met their evidence use goals set at baseline, and to identify key factors related to implementation of EIDM within the organization.Results: Post-program scores for knowledge and skills for EIDM were higher compared to pre-program scores (mean difference = 14.0%, 95% CI 8.2%, 19.8%). Organizations met their goals for evidence use to varying degrees. Key themes identified that support an organizational shift to EIDM include definitive plans for participants to share knowledge during and after program completion, embedding evidence into decision making processes, and supportive leadership with organizational investment of time and resources. The location, setting or size of health units was not associated with attainment of EIDM goals; small, rural health units were not at a disadvantage compared to larger, urban health units.Conclusions: The Knowledge Broker mentoring program effectively increased participants’ knowledge and skill, allowing them to share their learning and support change at their health units. When paired with organizational supports such as supportive leadership and resource investment, this program holds promise as an innovative knowledge translation strategy for organization wide EIDM among public health organizations.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.