Search Database

KT Strategies - Search Results

You searched for records matching:

1. Citation: LaRocca, R., Yost, J., Dobbins, M., Ciliska, D., & Butt, M. (2012). The effectiveness of knowledge translation strategies used in public health: a systematic review. BMC Public Health, 12, 751. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-12-751
Title: The effectiveness of knowledge translation strategies used in public health: a systematic review
Author(s): LaRocca, R.
Yost, J.
Dobbins, M.
Ciliska, D.
Butt, M.
Year: 2012
Journal/Publication: BMC Public Health
Abstract:

Background

Literature related to the effectiveness of knowledge translation (KT) strategies used in public health is lacking. The capacity to seek, analyze, and synthesize evidence-based information in public health is linked to greater success in making policy choices that have the best potential to yield positive outcomes for populations. The purpose of this systematic review is to identify the effectiveness of KT strategies used to promote evidence-informed decision making (EIDM) among public health decision makers.

Methods

A search strategy was developed to identify primary studies published between 2000–2010. Studies were obtained from multiple electronic databases (CINAHL, Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews). Searches were supplemented by hand searching and checking the reference lists of included articles. Two independent review authors screened studies for relevance, assessed methodological quality of relevant studies, and extracted data from studies using standardized tools.

Results

After removal of duplicates, the search identified 64, 391 titles related to KT strategies. Following title and abstract review, 346 publications were deemed potentially relevant, of which 5 met all relevance criteria on full text screen. The included publications were of moderate quality and consisted of five primary studies (four randomized controlled trials and one interrupted time series analysis). Results were synthesized narratively. Simple or single KT strategies were shown in some circumstances to be as effective as complex, multifaceted ones when changing practice including tailored and targeted messaging. Multifaceted KT strategies led to changes in knowledge but not practice. Knowledge translation strategies shown to be less effective were passive and included access to registries of pre-processed research evidence or print materials. While knowledge brokering did not have a significant effect generally, results suggested that it did have a positive effect on those organizations that at baseline perceived their organization to place little value on evidence-informed decision making.

Conclusions

No singular KT strategy was shown to be effective in all contexts. Conclusions about interventions cannot be taken on their own without considering the characteristics of the knowledge that was being transferred, providers, participants and organizations.

Keywords:
Knowledge translation; Public health; Research utilisation; Research transfer


Copyright © 2012 LaRocca, R. et al. Abstract reprinted by AIR in compliance with the BioMed Central Open Access Charter at http://www.biomedcentral.com/about/policies/license-agreement.
WEB URI:

http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/12/751

Type of Item: Systematic Review/Meta-Analysis
Type of KT Strategy: Educational Outreach/Person to Person TA
Knowledge Broker
Multifaceted Interventions
Printed Educational Materials
Targeted Messages
Target Group: Business/Employer/Industry
Decision Maker
Healthcare Professional
Research Funders
Researchers
Service Provider
Evidence Level: 5
Record Updated:2013-07-18
 

Home or Search again

American Institutes for Research (AIR) logo
About AIR | AIR Topics | Contact AIR
Center on Knowledge Translation for Disability and Rehabilitation Research (KTDRR)
© 2019 American Institutes for Research (AIR).

The contents of this site were developed under grant number 90DPKT0001 from the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research (NIDILRR). NIDILRR is a Center within the Administration for Community Living (ACL), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The contents of this website do not necessarily represent the policy of NIDILRR, ACL, HHS, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government.


the National Institute on Disability Independent Living and Rehabilitation Research logo