Core knowledge translation competencies: a scoping review

Μαλλίδου, Αναστασία; Atherton, Pat; Chan, Liza; Frisch, Noreen; Glegg, Stephanie; Scarrow, Gayle

doi:10.1186/s12913-018-3314-4

Cited by 84 publications

(123 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It stands to reason that a topic deserving further exploration is how building institutional capacity is reinforced by paying attention to the capacity of individuals and groups within institutions. In relation to the skills (i.e., impact competencies; Bayley, Phipps, Batac, & Stevens, 2018;Bayley & Phipps, 2019b;Mallidou, Atherton, Chan, Frisch, Glegg, & Scarrow, 2018) and knowledge (i.e., impact literacy; Bayley & Phipps, 2019a, 2019b needed to support impact, future studies could explore how individual and institutional impact competencies and literacies can work synergistically to support impact pathways.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How a Networked Approach to Building Capacity in Knowledge Mobilization Supports Research Impact

MacGregor

Phipps

2020

IJEPL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research impact is emerging as a common feature in national research systems. Knowledge mobilization (KMb) includes efforts undertaken to aid and accelerate research impact pathways by directing focus to processes that support impact. To date, researchers and universities have struggled to increase their capacity in KMb. This study explores the perceptions held by 16 leaders of Research Impact Canada, representing 14 networked universities, about the usefulness and use of networked learning to build institutional capacity in KMb. The analysis of data, which was collected using a mixed-methods survey design, highlights two overarching themes: 1) the contextual variability in how institutions engage in KMb work, and how practice-based subgroups can support the diverse KMb needs of different institutions; and 2) how capacity is developed through networked learning is distributed among individuals and groups within institutions, and how networked institutions need to be self-referential to the ways knowledge about KMb is sourced, validated, shared, interpreted, and employed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How a Networked Approach to Building Capacity in Knowledge Mobilization Supports Research Impact

MacGregor

Phipps

2020

IJEPL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Researchers and practitioners agree that disseminating research through publications and conference presentations may not be enough to change practice in meaningful and sustainable ways (Bennett et al, 2018). Several theoretical and pragmatic methods to narrow the evidence gap have been developed, and although these models require competencies that include research literacy (e.g., skills in research and EBP processes, resources, and dissemination methods), understanding data synthesis and application across various settings and populations (e.g., empirical research; annual, technical, and project reports; white papers; organizational documents), and a lifelong commitment to collaboratively share knowledge and foster innovation in one's unique practice context (Mallidou et al, 2018), few offer clear application processes to facilitate KT. The development of competencies alone may be insufficient to make research accessible to practitioners (Lencucha et al, 2007).…”

Section: Challenges In Translating Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The gap between what is known, how it is disseminated and absorbed, and what is done in practice has a significant impact on service delivery outcomes (Davis et al, 2003). Occupational therapy practitioners are at risk of using interventions that are unnecessary, are contraindicated, or lack sufficient evidence and of missing opportunities to introduce interventions that can more effectively, efficiently, or predictably improve clients' participation and performance (Mallidou et al, 2018).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Becoming Critical Consumers of Evidence in Occupational Therapy for Children and Youth

Grajo

Laverdure

Weaver

et al. 2020

The American Journal of Occupational Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This special issue of the American Journal of Occupational Therapy on interventions for children and youth highlights the current developments in and evidence for the effectiveness of occupational therapy interventions and psychometric properties of assessments for children and youth. In this guest editorial, we identify various factors that challenge the implementation of evidence-based strategies in daily clinical practice. We assert that scholars, educators, and practitioners need to address several strategic steps. To facilitate critical consumption of evidence in practice, efforts need to be made to build capacity for evidence production and evidence use through implementation science and to ensure that evidence-based practice is not only taught but also reflectively applied across the educational curriculum and that clinicians are given more access to resources that are easy to translate to daily clinical practice. I n the past decade, growth of the published evidence on the efficacy and effectiveness of occupational therapy interventions for children and youth has been expansive. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy has published three special issues focusing on children and youth: first in 2013 (early intervention), second in 2018 (sensory integration), and the current issue (interventions for children and youth). This special issue contains 17 articles addressing various current issues and trends in occupational therapy practice for children and youth, including 8 systematic reviews, 6 of which are part of the American Occupational Therapy Association's (AOTA's) Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) Project. AOTA has also published four practice guidelines for children and youth based on many of the systematic reviews that have been completed: early childhood (ages 0-5 yr; Frolek-Clark & Kingsley, 2013); mental health promotion, prevention, and intervention (Bazyk & Arbesman, 2013); children and adolescents with challenges in sensory processing and integration (Watling et al., 2018); and people with autism spectrum disorder (Tomchek & Koenig, 2016). Updates and expansions to current practice guidelines as well as new practice guidelines for children and youth (ages 5-21 yr) are forthcoming. Systematic reviews are increasingly being used as a mechanism to consolidate information on intervention efficacy and effectiveness. However, the use of systematic reviews has been documented as posing challenges to daily use by practicing clinicians (Gervais et al., 2002). Using a focus group discussion methodology, DiRezze et al. (2013) explored how the use of tables summarizing findings from systematic reviews can aid practitioners in translating knowledge to practice, known as knowledge translation (KT). They found that practitioners may benefit from translation of technical statistical findings, summaries of direct and practical

show abstract

“…We conducted a qualitative study with participants and academic institutions in 6 countries (Bangladesh, DRC, Ethiopia, India, Indonesia, and Nigeria) and found that soft-skills, robust networks, and alignment between institutional priorities and incentives are important factors that shape institutional capacity to conduct KT activities in LMICs (9). While strategies such as trainings, mentorship, and institutional leadership engagement have been developed to address these barriers and speci c factors (10,11), these strategies have been mostly applied to academic institutions in highincome countries (HICs) (12)(13)(14) with limited empirical evidence of their effectiveness in LMIC settings (15).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing a tool to assess institutional readiness to conduct knowledge translation activities in low-and middle-income countries

Kalbarczyk¹,

Rao²,

Alonge³

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Academic institutions are well-poised to conduct knowledge translation (KT) but face many barriers, particularly in low resource settings where the need is greatest. Assessing the readiness of academic institutions to conduct KT can help our understanding of these barriers. However, limited research has been conducted to understand influencers of readiness for KT in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and there are no tools for KT readiness assessment designed for LMIC contexts. This paper describes the development of a tool for assessing organizational readiness to conduct KT among academic institutions in LMICs. Methods A literature review and stakeholder consultation process was conducted to identify constructs and items relevant for assessing KT readiness in LMICs. These were face validated with LMIC stakeholders and organized into a questionnaire measured on a Likert scale. A quantitative survey was conducted and the questionnaire distributed to faculty based at 6 LMIC academic institutions, as well as members of a global knowledge-to-action thematic working group. An exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was used to identify underlying dimensions of a tool for assessing institutional readiness to conduct KT. Results A total of 111 respondents with varied KT experiences from 10 LMICs (including Bangladesh, Ethiopia, DR Congo, India, Indonesia, Nigeria) were included in the analysis. We selected five factors and 23 items, with factor loadings ranging from 0.40 to 0.77. The five factors include 1) institutional climate, 2) organization change efficacy, 3) prioritization and cosmopolitanism, 4) self-efficacy, and 5) financial resources. These five factors accounted for 69% of the total variance, with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients of 0.78, 0.73, 0.62, 0.68, and 0.52, respectively. Conclusions This study identify a tool for assessing readiness of LMIC academic institutions to conduct KT, and unique opportunities for building capacity among academic institutions for KT. The organizational focus of these factors underscores the need for strategies that address organizational systems and structures in addition to individual knowledge, skills, and tools. Future research will be conducted to understand determinants of these factors and develop a comprehensive set of capacity building strategies responsive to academic institutions in LMICs.

show abstract

Core knowledge translation competencies: a scoping review

Cited by 84 publications

References 57 publications

How a Networked Approach to Building Capacity in Knowledge Mobilization Supports Research Impact

How a Networked Approach to Building Capacity in Knowledge Mobilization Supports Research Impact

Becoming Critical Consumers of Evidence in Occupational Therapy for Children and Youth

Developing a tool to assess institutional readiness to conduct knowledge translation activities in low-and middle-income countries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About