A Credibilidade Científica do Investigador e a Transferência do Conhecimento

Abstract

Health sciences in general, and nursing in particular, have witnessed a fruitful scientific and technological production movement, which undoubtedly has contributed to improving the care offered to the population at different prevention levels. 1 However, it takes time for the obtained gains, that is, for research results to be introduced in clinical practice, and authors advocate the emergence of a new paradigm that promotes the fast and safe use of these results in decision-making. 2 Knowledge transfer to clinical practice is not exactly a recent subject in public and academic discussion about the topic. In the past years, researchers have been faced with complex challenges, from study design to results application, that do not allow appropriation by praxis. The obstacles to the introduction of evidence are heterogeneous and related to methodological and ethical issues, scientific rigor, capacity to carry out projects, funding difficulties, pertinence and utility in the face of needs and health policies, efficacy in communication and dissemination, and lack of a scientific culture oriented toward collaborative work to develop products that promote the insertion of results in the appropriate contexts. [1][2][3] There is consensus that advocating a scientific culture based on good practices implies the need to coordinate the principles of honesty, reliability, impartiality, independence, rigorous communication, diligence, and justice with production and communication in science, 3 but urgency in using the results for the common good can be noticed, breaking the relative social isolation that characterizes scientific undertakings. 4

Nursing students' learning from involvement in research projects: an integrative literature review

“…The future and current success of the correct use of evidence seems to be related to the need to bring students closer to the contexts in which it is created (23) . This study corroborates the opinion of authors who argue that, although the topic of transferring knowledge and using it in clinical settings is not a recent topic in the academic and public debate, it is an emerging practice (24) .…”

Da investigação para a clínica: (des)evidências

“…3 This adaptation of the results to the context and to individual needs breaks with the status quo of globalizing results and requires differentiation and contextualization of studies, with the help of researchers. 4 These guidelines for the use of evidence reinforce the importance of choosing the therapeutic option that proves to be the most appropriate, following individual clinical circumstances and with the values and preferences of people and caregivers. In many cases, evidence alone is never sufficient to make clinical decisions, analyze cost-benefit, the associated burden, and the costs involved in the decision.…”

“…3 We corroborate the opinion of authors who advocate the presence of research teams in the field and collaborative work to design studies and to assist in the transfer of knowledge to users (health professionals) and beneficiaries (clients and caregivers) of such research. 1,4 However, we have found that policymakers and managers of health units have not weighed the impact of removing researchers from their settings during the pandemic, nor have they considered the effect on the much desired evidence-based practice, maybe because they prioritize unidirectional models of knowledge transfer.…”