Fostering interactions: the networking needs of community health nursing researchers and decision makers

Kothari, Anita; Edwards, Nancy; Brajtman, Susan; Campbell, Barbara; Hamel, Nadia; Legault, Frances; Mill, Judy; Valaitis, Ruta

doi:10.1332/1744264054851577

Cited by 10 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 20 publications

(9 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Careers in both clinical research, and health services and policy research will be fostered by a strong set of networks (CHSRF, 2003(CHSRF, , 2006Kothari et al, 2005). Emerging evidence (Gilchrist, 2006;Heurta, Casebeer, & VanderPlaat, 2006;Scott & Hofmeyer, 2007) suggests that network development entails deliberate processes and the establishment of relational capital.…”

Section: Network Of Researchers and Decision-makersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They provided critical mentorship for interns by acting as advisors and inviting interns to join their writing or research projects, which in a number of cases were subsequently published or funded (e.g., Benjamin, Edwards, & Caswell, 2009;Edwards, Etowa, & Kennedy, 2007;Edwards et al, 2008;Edwards, Marck, Virani, Davies, & Rowan, 2007;Kothari et al, 2005). In the first year of the program, Dr. Edwards and one postdoctoral fellow provided mentorship for the interns.…”

Section: Critical Elements Of the Internshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Building Nurses' Capacity in Community Health Services

Edwards

MacDonald

2009

International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper describes core processes, components, and insights gained from a research internship offered through the University of Ottawa, Canada. The growing demand for high quality nursing research requires the development and implementation of strategies for enhanced research capacity. A three-month intensive internship was developed as a main feature of a nursing chair held by the first author. The internship was deliberately structured around core processes of providing individual and group mentoring, creating opportunities for experiential education, and strengthening networks with researchers and decision-makers in health services and policy research. Building and sustaining individual research capacity was supported with strategies to address system challenges. If nurses are going to make their voices heard and increase their contributions to novel health service delivery approaches, building research capacity will be a core element. The internship may be a useful prototype for the development of initiatives to build research capacity in other settings.

show abstract

Section: Network Of Researchers and Decision-makersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Critical Elements Of the Internshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

Building Nurses' Capacity in Community Health Services

Edwards

MacDonald

2009

International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The collaboration between researchers and knowledge users in the health science field is increasingly promoted because it could enhance the effective use of research results in policy decisions and in practice settings. 1 , 2 By involving decision-makers in the research process, it is suggested that it allows for their interaction with researchers around the tasks of asking and answering relevant questions 3 for the common goal of solving complex health problems. 4 Frequent interactions between the two groups are thought to assist researchers in developing research questions that are relevant to political priorities and contextual opportunities, and gain greater sensitivity to the decision-making context.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Collaboration Between Researchers and Knowledge Users in Health Technology Assessment: A Qualitative Exploratory Study

Dipankui

2016

Int J Health Policy Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Collaboration between researchers and knowledge users is increasingly promoted because it could enhance more evidence-based decision-making and practice. These complex relationships differ in form, in the particular goals they are trying to achieve, and in whom they bring together. Although much is understood about why partnerships form, relatively little is known about how collaboration works: how the collaborative process is shaped through the partners’ interactions, especially in the field of health technology assessment (HTA)? This study aims at addressing this gap in the literature in the specific context of HTA. Methods: We used a qualitative descriptive design for this exploratory study. Semi-structured interviews with three researchers and two decision-makers were conducted on the practices related to the collaboration. We also performed document analysis, observation of five team meetings, and informal discussion with the participants. We thematically analyzed data using the structuration theory and a collective impact framework. Results: This study showed that three main contextual factors helped shape the collaboration between researchers and knowledge users: the use of concepts related to each field; the use of related expertise; and a lack of clearly defined roles in the project. Previous experiences with the topic of the research project and a partnership based on "a give and take" relationship emerged as factors of success of this collaboration. Conclusion: By shedding light on the structuration of the collaboration between researchers and knowledge users, our findings open the door to a poorly documented field in the area of HTA, and additional studies that build on these early observations are welcome.

show abstract

“…The evidence suggests that KTE strategies need to be interactive [ 7 - 9 ] and involve face-to-face interaction [ 10 - 12 ]. Involvement of decision-makers in the research process has also been associated with higher degrees of uptake [ 13 , 14 ], and when the results or 'actionable messages' of research results are tailored to the specific needs of decision-makers then reported uptake is higher [ 1 , 4 , 7 , 15 , 16 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A knowledge management tool for public health: health-evidence.ca

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe ultimate goal of knowledge translation and exchange (KTE) activities is to facilitate incorporation of research knowledge into program and policy development decision making. Evidence-informed decision making involves translation of the best available evidence from a systematically collected, appraised, and analyzed body of knowledge. Knowledge management (KM) is emerging as a key factor contributing to the realization of evidence-informed public health decision making. The goal of health-evidence.ca is to promote evidence-informed public health decision making through facilitation of decision maker access to, retrieval, and use of the best available synthesized research evidence evaluating the effectiveness of public health interventions.MethodsThe systematic reviews that populate health evidence.ca are identified through an extensive search (1985-present) of 7 electronic databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Sociological Abstracts, BIOSIS, and SportDiscus; handsearching of over 20 journals; and reference list searches of all relevant reviews. Reviews are assessed for relevance and quality by two independent reviewers. Commonly-used public health terms are used to assign key words to each review, and project staff members compose short summaries highlighting results and implications for policy and practice.ResultsAs of June 2010, there are 1913 reviews in the health-evidence.ca registry in 21 public health and health promotion topic areas. Of these, 78% have been assessed as being of strong or moderate methodological quality. Health-evidence.ca receives approximately 35,000 visits per year, 20,596 of which are unique visitors, representing approximately 100 visits per day. Just under half of all visitors return to the site, with the average user spending six minutes and visiting seven pages per visit. Public health nurses, program managers, health promotion workers, researchers, and program coordinators are among the largest groups of registered users, followed by librarians, dieticians, medical officers of health, and nutritionists. The majority of users (67%) access the website from direct traffic (e.g., have the health-evidence.ca webpage bookmarked, or type it directly into their browser).ConclusionsConsistent use of health-evidence.ca and particularly the searching for reviews that correspond with current public health priorities illustrates that health-evidence.ca may be playing an important role in achieving evidence-informed public health decision making.

show abstract

Fostering interactions: the networking needs of community health nursing researchers and decision makers

Cited by 10 publications

References 20 publications

Building Nurses' Capacity in Community Health Services

Building Nurses' Capacity in Community Health Services

Collaboration Between Researchers and Knowledge Users in Health Technology Assessment: A Qualitative Exploratory Study

A knowledge management tool for public health: health-evidence.ca

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About