Using the Knowledge to Action Framework in practice: a citation analysis and systematic review

Abstract

BackgroundConceptual frameworks are recommended as a way of applying theory to enhance implementation efforts. The Knowledge to Action (KTA) Framework was developed in Canada by Graham and colleagues in the 2000s, following a review of 31 planned action theories. The framework has two components: Knowledge Creation and an Action Cycle, each of which comprises multiple phases. This review sought to answer two questions: ‘Is the KTA Framework used in practice? And if so, how?’MethodsThis study is a citation analysis and systematic review. The index citation for the original paper was identified on three databases—Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar—with the facility for citation searching. Limitations of English language and year of publication 2006-June 2013 were set. A taxonomy categorising the continuum of usage was developed. Only studies applying the framework to implementation projects were included. Data were extracted and mapped against each phase of the framework for studies where it was integral to the implementation project.ResultsThe citation search yielded 1,787 records. A total of 1,057 titles and abstracts were screened. One hundred and forty-six studies described usage to varying degrees, ranging from referenced to integrated. In ten studies, the KTA Framework was integral to the design, delivery and evaluation of the implementation activities. All ten described using the Action Cycle and seven referred to Knowledge Creation. The KTA Framework was enacted in different health care and academic settings with projects targeted at patients, the public, and nursing and allied health professionals.ConclusionsThe KTA Framework is being used in practice with varying degrees of completeness. It is frequently cited, with usage ranging from simple attribution via a reference, through informing planning, to making an intellectual contribution. When the framework was integral to knowledge translation, it guided action in idiosyncratic ways and there was theory fidelity. Prevailing wisdom encourages the use of theories, models and conceptual frameworks, yet their application is less evident in practice. This may be an artefact of reporting, indicating that prospective, primary research is needed to explore the real value of the KTA Framework and similar tools.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-014-0172-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Measuring academic research impact: creating a citation profile using the conceptual framework for implementation fidelity as a case study

“…A scoping process conducted on the 50 most recent publications citing the key paper identified a citation frequency within the publications ranging from 1 to 13. For the purposes of this study, impact was categorised by simple frequency, so that a single citation of the key paper within the citing publication was considered to represent low impact (likely to be just a reference "in passing" to the key paper (Field et al 2014)); two citations represented moderate impact; and three or more citations represented high impact (see Table 1). The result would be a "citation profile" for the key paper, which indicated the number of publications on which it had had a "high impact" and what percentage this represented as a proportion of all citing publications.…”

PYDSportNET: A knowledge translation project bridging gaps between research and practice in youth sport

“…PYDSportNET was directed by the Knowledge to Action (KTA) framework (Figure 1; Graham et al, 2006), which has been used in over 140 studies in the health services literature (Field et al, 2014). The KTA framework has two interconnected components: knowledge creation and the action cycle.…”

“…Knowledge translation frameworks should be used to drive knowledge translation research projects, because they provide frames of reference for organizing thinking, action, and interpretation (Field, Booth, Ilott, & Gerrish, 2014). PYDSportNET was directed by the Knowledge to Action (KTA) framework (Figure 1; Graham et al, 2006), which has been used in over 140 studies in the health services literature (Field et al, 2014).…”

What Do the People Who Use the Research Results Think? Attempting Integrated Knowledge Translation in the 'Knowledge Creation' Phase

“…A recent systematic review of the KTA Framework indicated its application in a range of idiosyncratic forms with far greater emphasis on the Action Cycle as opposed to Knowledge Creation [8] thus thwarting any comprehensive understanding of the dynamic interaction between them [13]. Yet, we do know that decision makers use research results when there is a greater linkage and exchange between the worlds of research and policy, addressing the kinds of questions of interest to policy makers [15].…”

“…Collaboration, like that promoted through iKT, involves ongoing, dynamic interaction among researchers and knowledge users, representing an ideal means by which to address complex problems [7]. Within this integrated process, both phases remain permeable, although, a recent systematic review finds few examples in the literature of a comprehensive application of the framework [8].…”