» Articles » PMID: 31366641

Taking an Integrated Knowledge Translation Approach in Research to Develop the CONSORT-Equity 2017 Reporting Guideline: an Observational Study

Overview
Journal BMJ Open
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2019 Aug 2
PMID 31366641
Citations 7
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: We describe the use of an integrated knowledge translation (KT) approach in the development of the CONsolidated Standards Of Reporting Trials extension for equity ('CONSORT-Equity 2017'), and advisory board-research team members' ('the team') perceptions of the integrated KT process.

Design: This is an observational study to describe team processes and experience with a structured integrated KT approach to develop CONSORT-Equity 2017. Participant observation to describe team processes and a survey were used with the 38 team members.

Setting: Use of the CONSORT health research reporting guideline contributes to an evidence base for health systems decision-making, and CONSORT-Equity 2017 may improve reporting about health equity-relevant evidence. An integrated KT research approach engages knowledge users (those for whom the research is meant to be useful) with researchers to co-develop research evidence and is more likely to produce findings that are applied in practice or policy.

Participants: Researchers adopted an integrated KT approach and invited knowledge users to form a team.

Results: An integrated KT approach was used in the development of CONSORT-Equity 2017 and structured replicable steps. The process for co-developing the reporting guideline involved two stages: (1) establishing guiding features for co-development and (2) research actions that supported the co-development of the reporting guideline. Stage 1 consisted of four steps: finding common ground, forming an advisory board, committing to ethical guidance and clarifying theoretical research assumptions. Bound by the stage 1 guiding features of an integrated KT approach, stage 2 consisted of five steps during which studies for consensus-based reporting guidelines were conducted. Of 38 team members, 25 (67.5%) completed a survey about their perceptions of the integrated KT approach.

Conclusions: An integrated KT approach can be used to engage a team to co-develop reporting guidelines. Further study is needed to understand the use of an integrated KT approach in the development of reporting guidelines.

Citing Articles

Co-production of a systematic review on decision coaching: a mixed methods case study within a review.

Jull J, Smith M, Carley M, Stacey D, Graham I Syst Rev. 2024; 13(1):149.

PMID: 38831444 PMC: 11149211. DOI: 10.1186/s13643-024-02563-8.


Interventions for Indigenous Peoples making health decisions: a systematic review.

Jull J, Fairman K, Oliver S, Hesmer B, Pullattayil A Arch Public Health. 2023; 81(1):174.

PMID: 37759336 PMC: 10523645. DOI: 10.1186/s13690-023-01177-1.


Dynamic geographical accessibility assessments to improve health equity: protocol for a test case in Cali, Colombia.

Cuervo L, Jaramillo C, Cuervo D, Martinez-Herrera E, Hatcher-Roberts J, Pinilla L F1000Res. 2023; 11:1394.

PMID: 37469626 PMC: 10352632. DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.127294.1.


Improving social justice in observational studies: protocol for the development of a global and Indigenous STROBE-equity reporting guideline.

Funnell S, Jull J, Mbuagbaw L, Welch V, Dewidar O, Wang X Int J Equity Health. 2023; 22(1):55.

PMID: 36991403 PMC: 10060140. DOI: 10.1186/s12939-023-01854-1.


Fit for purpose. Co-production of complex behavioural interventions. A practical guide and exemplar of co-producing a telehealth-delivered exercise intervention for people with stroke.

Ramage E, Burke M, Galloway M, Graham I, Janssen H, Marsden D Health Res Policy Syst. 2022; 20(1):2.

PMID: 34980156 PMC: 8722305. DOI: 10.1186/s12961-021-00790-2.


References
1.
Turner L, Shamseer L, Altman D, Schulz K, Moher D . Does use of the CONSORT Statement impact the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials published in medical journals? A Cochrane review. Syst Rev. 2012; 1:60. PMC: 3564748. DOI: 10.1186/2046-4053-1-60. View

2.
Petticrew M, Whitehead M, Macintyre S, Graham H, Egan M . Evidence for public health policy on inequalities: 1: the reality according to policymakers. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2004; 58(10):811-6. PMC: 1763325. DOI: 10.1136/jech.2003.015289. View

3.
Sheridan S, Schrandt S, Forsythe L, Hilliard T, Paez K . The PCORI Engagement Rubric: Promising Practices for Partnering in Research. Ann Fam Med. 2017; 15(2):165-170. PMC: 5348236. DOI: 10.1370/afm.2042. View

4.
Sackett D, Rosenberg W, Gray J, Haynes R, Richardson W . Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ. 1996; 312(7023):71-2. PMC: 2349778. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.312.7023.71. View

5.
James S, Arniella G, Bickell N, Walker W, Robinson V, Taylor B . Community ACTION boards: an innovative model for effective community-academic research partnerships. Prog Community Health Partnersh. 2012; 5(4):399-404. PMC: 3437746. View