» Articles » PMID: 22651257

Knowledge Translation of Research Findings

Overview
Journal Implement Sci
Publisher Biomed Central
Specialty Health Services
Date 2012 Jun 2
PMID 22651257
Citations 845
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: One of the most consistent findings from clinical and health services research is the failure to translate research into practice and policy. As a result of these evidence-practice and policy gaps, patients fail to benefit optimally from advances in healthcare and are exposed to unnecessary risks of iatrogenic harms, and healthcare systems are exposed to unnecessary expenditure resulting in significant opportunity costs. Over the last decade, there has been increasing international policy and research attention on how to reduce the evidence-practice and policy gap. In this paper, we summarise the current concepts and evidence to guide knowledge translation activities, defined as T2 research (the translation of new clinical knowledge into improved health). We structure the article around five key questions: what should be transferred; to whom should research knowledge be transferred; by whom should research knowledge be transferred; how should research knowledge be transferred; and, with what effect should research knowledge be transferred?

Discussion: We suggest that the basic unit of knowledge translation should usually be up-to-date systematic reviews or other syntheses of research findings. Knowledge translators need to identify the key messages for different target audiences and to fashion these in language and knowledge translation products that are easily assimilated by different audiences. The relative importance of knowledge translation to different target audiences will vary by the type of research and appropriate endpoints of knowledge translation may vary across different stakeholder groups. There are a large number of planned knowledge translation models, derived from different disciplinary, contextual (i.e., setting), and target audience viewpoints. Most of these suggest that planned knowledge translation for healthcare professionals and consumers is more likely to be successful if the choice of knowledge translation strategy is informed by an assessment of the likely barriers and facilitators. Although our evidence on the likely effectiveness of different strategies to overcome specific barriers remains incomplete, there is a range of informative systematic reviews of interventions aimed at healthcare professionals and consumers (i.e., patients, family members, and informal carers) and of factors important to research use by policy makers.

Summary: There is a substantial (if incomplete) evidence base to guide choice of knowledge translation activities targeting healthcare professionals and consumers. The evidence base on the effects of different knowledge translation approaches targeting healthcare policy makers and senior managers is much weaker but there are a profusion of innovative approaches that warrant further evaluation.

Citing Articles

Human interactions remain at the heart of rehabilitation with advanced technology: a practice-embedded longitudinal qualitative study with allied health clinicians.

Pearce L, Hassett L, Sherrington C, Pryor J J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2025; 22(1):52.

PMID: 40050924 PMC: 11887193. DOI: 10.1186/s12984-025-01576-1.


Implementing Clinical Practice Guidelines: Considerations for Epileptologists.

Gutierrez C, Roberson S, Esmaeili B, Punia V, Johnson E Epilepsy Curr. 2025; :15357597251318536.

PMID: 40040859 PMC: 11873851. DOI: 10.1177/15357597251318536.


Research priority setting for implementation science and practice: a living systematic review protocol.

Zhao J, Chen W, Bai W, Zhang X, Hui R, Chen S Syst Rev. 2025; 14(1):51.

PMID: 40022142 PMC: 11871763. DOI: 10.1186/s13643-025-02786-3.


Development of a key performance indicator set for perioperative red blood cell transfusion.

Shah A, Evans H, Palmer A, MacDonald A, Belete M, von Neree L BJA Open. 2025; 13:100372.

PMID: 39968291 PMC: 11833354. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjao.2024.100372.


Understanding variations in the use of tranexamic acid in surgery: A qualitative interview study.

Strickland L, Evans H, Palmer A, Warnakulasuriya S, Murphy M, Stanworth S Br J Haematol. 2025; 206(3):965-976.

PMID: 39966105 PMC: 11886940. DOI: 10.1111/bjh.20008.


References
1.
Lavis J, Lomas J, Hamid M, Sewankambo N . Assessing country-level efforts to link research to action. Bull World Health Organ. 2006; 84(8):620-8. PMC: 2627430. DOI: 10.2471/blt.06.030312. View

2.
Gardner B, Whittington C, McAteer J, Eccles M, Michie S . Using theory to synthesise evidence from behaviour change interventions: the example of audit and feedback. Soc Sci Med. 2010; 70(10):1618-25. DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.01.039. View

3.
Bosch-Capblanch X, Abba K, Prictor M, Garner P . Contracts between patients and healthcare practitioners for improving patients' adherence to treatment, prevention and health promotion activities. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007; (2):CD004808. PMC: 6464838. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004808.pub3. View

4.
Fretheim A, Oxman A, Lavis J, Lewin S . SUPPORT tools for evidence-informed policymaking in health 18: Planning monitoring and evaluation of policies. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009; 7 Suppl 1:S18. PMC: 3271828. DOI: 10.1186/1478-4505-7-S1-S18. View

5.
Ellen M, Lavis J, Ouimet M, Grimshaw J, Bedard P . Determining research knowledge infrastructure for healthcare systems: a qualitative study. Implement Sci. 2011; 6:60. PMC: 3123231. DOI: 10.1186/1748-5908-6-60. View