Strengthening population health interventions: developing the CollaboraKTion Framework for Community-Based Knowledge Translation

Abstract

BackgroundMuch of the research and theorising in the knowledge translation (KT) field has focused on clinical settings, providing little guidance to those working in community settings. In this study, we build on previous research in community-based KT by detailing the theory driven and empirically-informed CollaboraKTion framework.MethodsA case study design and ethnographic methods were utilised to gain an in-depth understanding of the processes for conducting a community-based KT study as a means to distilling the CollaboraKTion framework. Drawing on extensive field notes describing fieldwork observations and interactions as well as evidence from the participatory research and KT literature, we detail the processes and steps undertaken in this community-based KT study as well as their rationale and the challenges encountered. In an effort to build upon existing knowledge, Kitson and colleagues’ co-KT framework, which provides guidance for conducting KT aimed at addressing population-level health, was applied as a coding structure to inform the current analysis. This approach was selected because it (1) supported the application of an existing community-based KT framework to empirical data and (2) provided an opportunity to contribute to the theory and practice gaps in the community-based KT literature through an inductively derived empirical example.ResultsAnalysis revealed that community-based KT is an iterative process that can be viewed as comprising five overarching processes: (1) contacting and connecting; (2) deepening understandings; (3) adapting and applying the knowledge base; (4) supporting and evaluating continued action; and (5) transitioning and embedding as well as several key elements within each of these processes (e.g. building on existing knowledge, establishing partnerships). These empirically informed theory advancements in KT and participatory research traditions are summarised in the CollaboraKTion framework. We suggest that community-based KT researchers place less emphasis on enhancing uptake of specific interventions and focus on collaboratively identifying and creating changes to the contextual factors that influence health outcomes.ConclusionsThe CollaboraKTion framework can be used to guide the development, implementation and evaluation of contextually relevant, evidence-informed initiatives aimed at improving population health, amid providing a foundation to leverage future research and practice in this emergent KT area.

How is knowledge shared in Public involvement? A qualitative study of involvement in a health technology assessment

“…In addition, we provide an example of a ‘drop in’ involvement session, which allows researchers to speak briefly to a variety of different people who might not want to attend a bespoke workshop, but welcome the opportunity to share views to influence research. As such, we add to a growing body of work that illustrates innovative ways of facilitating discussions on research and gaining input from members of the public …”

“…As such, we add to a growing body of work that illustrates innovative ways of facilitating discussions on research and gaining input from members of the public. [26][27][28] The one-to-one approach at the community centre drop-in may have value beyond group discussion, allowing members of the public space to share more contested views and should be considered a useful addition to structured group-based involvement meetings.…”

Assessing the impacts of the Agenda Gap intervention for youth mental health promotion through policy engagement: A study protocol

“…In the Canadian context, this has involved the emergence of provincial initiatives for including youth in government consultation to inform decisions about employment and child welfare, amongst others [15][16][17] and the development of Canada's rst national Youth Policy [18,19]. However, while youth engagement has attracted attention across sectors and there is broad consensus that youth engagement in the design of health-related initiatives can yield positive results [20][21][22], there is a paucity of evidence-based strategies to support their meaningful inclusion in policy processes [10]. This is a critical oversight.…”

“…Youth engagement in policy development -particularly those experiencing structural vulnerability and who are often excluded as a result -can deepen our understandings of youths' experiences of mental health [31,32]in their communities and, consequently, contribute to the development of contextually relevant and responsive mental health promotion intervention [20,33]. Given these current priorities and identi ed knowledge gaps, including a paucity of resources to build capacity for youth engaged policymaking [10], our team has developed a prototype intervention -the Agenda Gap -to equip youth for meaningful policy engagement.…”

Assessing the impacts of the Agenda Gap intervention for youth mental health promotion through policy engagement: A study protocol

“…In the Canadian context, this has involved the emergence of provincial initiatives for including youth in government consultation to inform decisions about employment and child welfare, amongst others [14-16] and the development of Canada's first national Youth Policy [17,18]. However, while youth engagement has attracted attention across sectors and there is broad consensus that youth engagement in the design of healthrelated initiatives can yield positive results [19][20][21], there is a paucity of evidence-based strategies to support their meaningful inclusion in policy processes [9]. This is a critical oversight.…”