Organizational supports for knowledge translation in paediatric health centres and research institutes: insights from a Canadian environmental scan

Abstract

Background Organizational supports are thought to help address wide-ranging barriers to evidence-informed health care (EIHC) and knowledge translation (KT). However, little is known about the nature of the resources and services that exist within paediatric health care and research settings across Canada to facilitate evidence use in health care delivery. This survey examined existing supports for EIHC/KT within these organizations to inform the design of similar EIHC/KT support programmes. Methods A national environmental scan was conducted using a bilingual online survey distributed to leaders at Canadian paediatric academic health science centres and their affiliated research institutes. Participants were invited through email, social media and webinar invitations and snowball sampling. Supports of interest included personnel, resources, services, organizational structures or processes, and partnerships or collaborations; barriers and successes were also probed. Data were compiled by site, reported using descriptive statistics, or grouped thematically. Supports were described using the AIMD (Aims, Ingredients, Mechanism, Delivery) framework. Results Thirty-one respondents from 17 sites across seven provinces represented a 49% site response rate. Eleven (65%) sites reported an on-site library with variable staffing and services. Ten (59%) sites reported a dedicated KT support unit or staff person. Supports ranged from education, resource development and consultation to protocol development, funded initiatives and collaborations. Organizations leveraged internal and external supports, with the majority also employing supports for clinical research integration. Supports perceived as most effective included personnel, targeted initiatives, leadership, interdepartmental expertise, external drivers and logistical support. Barriers included operational constraints, individual-level factors and lack of infrastructure. Conclusions This first survey of organizational supports for EIHC/KT identified the range of supports in place in paediatric research and health care organizations across Canada. The diversity of supports reported across sites may reflect differences in resource capacity and objectives. Similarities in EIHC/KT and research integration supports suggest common infrastructure may be feasible. Moreover, stakeholder engagement in research was common, but not pervasive. Tailored support programmes can target multi-faceted barriers. Findings can inform the development, refinement and evaluation of EIHC/KT support programmes and guide the study of the effectiveness and sustainability of these strategies.

Experiences of knowledge translation among researchers in transfusion medicine: Findings from an international survey study

“…A recent survey found that protected time and a dedicated KT practitioner or team are perceived as the most effective strategies to support KT in pediatric health centers and research institutes. 24 Organizations can help facilitate KT by building capacity for researchers to engage in KT. One potential approach is to encourage researchers to develop a KT plan as part of their grant or project proposals to ensure dedicated funding, resources, and time for KT activities.…”

“…The selected supports reflect this need, with two of the highest‐rated supports by our participants relating to more protected time and resources for KT. A recent survey found that protected time and a dedicated KT practitioner or team are perceived as the most effective strategies to support KT in pediatric health centers and research institutes 24 . Organizations can help facilitate KT by building capacity for researchers to engage in KT.…”

Bringing the Computer-Based instrument for Low motor Language Testing to Canada: A survey of caregiver and clinician perspectives

“…(2) determining 'who' needs to be approached to participate in the scan; (3) con rming 'what' needs to be asked by clarifying and nalizing questions and determining where and from whom answers can be obtained; (4) gathering information through literature review, interviews, or surveys; and (5) summarizing and presenting results (36). Environmental scans now commonly inform decision-making in both health and implementation research as a result of their utility in exploring and understanding the perspectives, experiences, practices, and needs of patients, communities and organizations (34,37,38,39,40,41,42).…”

“…This type of preliminary investigation was a critical next step towards the successful implementation of the C-BiLLT-CAN (33). Through an environmental scan of the current Canadian clinical practice and service contexts in which the C-BiLLT-CAN would be used, we surveyed caregivers of and clinicians working with children with CP and LFS to understand their perspectives, experiences, and practices (34). More speci cally, we aimed to describe Canadian caregivers' and clinicians' current experiences with and future needs for language comprehension assessment when working with children with CP and LFS.…”