A scoping review of full-spectrum knowledge translation theories, models, and frameworks.


Journal

Implementation science : IS
ISSN: 1748-5908
Titre abrégé: Implement Sci
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101258411

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
14 02 2020
Historique:
received: 08 09 2019
accepted: 06 01 2020
entrez: 16 2 2020
pubmed: 16 2 2020
medline: 3 2 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Application of knowledge translation (KT) theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs) is one method for successfully incorporating evidence into clinical care. However, there are multiple KT TMFs and little guidance on which to select. This study sought to identify and describe available full-spectrum KT TMFs to subsequently guide users. A scoping review was completed. Articles were identified through searches within electronic databases, previous reviews, grey literature, and consultation with KT experts. Search terms included combinations of KT terms and theory-related terms. Included citations had to describe full-spectrum KT TMFs that had been applied or tested. Titles/abstracts and full-text articles were screened independently by two investigators. Each KT TMF was described by its characteristics including name, context, key components, how it was used, primary target audience, levels of use, and study outcomes. Each KT TMF was also categorized into theoretical approaches as process models, determinant frameworks, classic theories, implementation theories, and evaluation frameworks. Within each category, KT TMFs were compared and contrasted to identify similarities and unique characteristics. Electronic searches yielded 7160 citations. Additional citations were identified from previous reviews (n = 41) and bibliographies of included full-text articles (n = 6). Thirty-six citations describing 36 full-spectrum were identified. In 24 KT TMFs, the primary target audience was multi-level including patients/public, professionals, organizational, and financial/regulatory. The majority of the KT TMFs were used within public health, followed by research (organizational, translation, health), or in multiple contexts. Twenty-six could be used at the individual, organization, or policy levels, five at the individual/organization levels, three at the individual level only, and two at the organizational/policy level. Categorization of the KT TMFs resulted in 18 process models, eight classic theories, three determinant frameworks, three evaluation frameworks, and four that fit more than one category. There were no KT TMFs that fit the implementation theory category. Within each category, similarities and unique characteristics emerged through comparison. A systematic compilation of existing full-spectrum KT TMFs, categorization into different approaches, and comparison has been provided in a user-friendly way. This list provides options for users to select from when designing KT projects and interventions. A protocol outlining the methodology of this scoping review was developed and registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018088564).

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Application of knowledge translation (KT) theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs) is one method for successfully incorporating evidence into clinical care. However, there are multiple KT TMFs and little guidance on which to select. This study sought to identify and describe available full-spectrum KT TMFs to subsequently guide users.
METHODS
A scoping review was completed. Articles were identified through searches within electronic databases, previous reviews, grey literature, and consultation with KT experts. Search terms included combinations of KT terms and theory-related terms. Included citations had to describe full-spectrum KT TMFs that had been applied or tested. Titles/abstracts and full-text articles were screened independently by two investigators. Each KT TMF was described by its characteristics including name, context, key components, how it was used, primary target audience, levels of use, and study outcomes. Each KT TMF was also categorized into theoretical approaches as process models, determinant frameworks, classic theories, implementation theories, and evaluation frameworks. Within each category, KT TMFs were compared and contrasted to identify similarities and unique characteristics.
RESULTS
Electronic searches yielded 7160 citations. Additional citations were identified from previous reviews (n = 41) and bibliographies of included full-text articles (n = 6). Thirty-six citations describing 36 full-spectrum were identified. In 24 KT TMFs, the primary target audience was multi-level including patients/public, professionals, organizational, and financial/regulatory. The majority of the KT TMFs were used within public health, followed by research (organizational, translation, health), or in multiple contexts. Twenty-six could be used at the individual, organization, or policy levels, five at the individual/organization levels, three at the individual level only, and two at the organizational/policy level. Categorization of the KT TMFs resulted in 18 process models, eight classic theories, three determinant frameworks, three evaluation frameworks, and four that fit more than one category. There were no KT TMFs that fit the implementation theory category. Within each category, similarities and unique characteristics emerged through comparison.
CONCLUSIONS
A systematic compilation of existing full-spectrum KT TMFs, categorization into different approaches, and comparison has been provided in a user-friendly way. This list provides options for users to select from when designing KT projects and interventions.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
A protocol outlining the methodology of this scoping review was developed and registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018088564).

Identifiants

pubmed: 32059738
doi: 10.1186/s13012-020-0964-5
pii: 10.1186/s13012-020-0964-5
pmc: PMC7023795
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Systematic Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

11

Commentaires et corrections

Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn

Références

Health Res Policy Syst. 2016 Aug 30;14(1):65
pubmed: 27578195
Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2013 Mar;11(1):46-55
pubmed: 23448330
Implement Sci. 2009 May 21;4:29
pubmed: 19460163
Health Info Libr J. 2015 Sep;32(3):220-35
pubmed: 26095232
Implement Sci. 2015 Apr 21;10:53
pubmed: 25895742
Am J Prev Med. 2012 Sep;43(3):337-50
pubmed: 22898128
Public Health Res Pract. 2017 Feb 15;27(1):
pubmed: 28243670
Implement Sci. 2010 Oct 25;5:82
pubmed: 20973988
J Clin Epidemiol. 2018 Aug;100:92-102
pubmed: 29660481
Am J Public Health. 2012 Apr;102(4):617-24
pubmed: 22397341
Implement Sci. 2017 Jan 5;12(1):2
pubmed: 28057049
Front Psychol. 2016 Feb 19;7:200
pubmed: 26925018
Public Health. 2013 Jun;127(6):538-45
pubmed: 23701813
Implement Sci. 2017 Oct 30;12(1):124
pubmed: 29084566
Am Psychol. 1992 Jan;47(1):6-22
pubmed: 1539925
BMJ Qual Saf. 2015 Mar;24(3):228-38
pubmed: 25616279
J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2010 Winter;30(1):65-71
pubmed: 20222041
Am J Public Health. 2012 Jul;102(7):1274-81
pubmed: 22594758
BMC Health Serv Res. 2012 Nov 14;12:394
pubmed: 23151082
Implement Sci. 2009 Aug 07;4:50
pubmed: 19664226
Am J Health Promot. 1997 Sep-Oct;12(1):38-48
pubmed: 10170434
BMC Health Serv Res. 2019 Mar 25;19(1):189
pubmed: 30909897
Implement Sci. 2013 May 21;8:54
pubmed: 23694753
Prog Community Health Partnersh. 2016;10(4):585-595
pubmed: 28569684
Prev Chronic Dis. 2013 Dec 12;10:E207
pubmed: 24331280
Am J Public Health. 2013 Jun;103(6):e38-46
pubmed: 23597377
J Neurol Phys Ther. 2016 Apr;40(2):107-14
pubmed: 26945430
Ann Intern Med. 2018 Oct 2;169(7):467-473
pubmed: 30178033
Am J Community Psychol. 2008 Jun;41(3-4):171-81
pubmed: 18302018
Am J Public Health. 1999 Sep;89(9):1322-7
pubmed: 10474547
BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 Aug 30;18(1):674
pubmed: 30165846
BMC Med. 2019 May 7;17(1):88
pubmed: 31064388
Int J Qual Health Care. 2017 Oct 1;29(5):740-744
pubmed: 28992157
Implement Sci. 2015 Mar 03;10:27
pubmed: 25885047
Implement Sci. 2011 Apr 23;6:42
pubmed: 21513547
Int J Ment Health Syst. 2018 Jan 22;12:5
pubmed: 29387148
J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2006 Winter;26(1):13-24
pubmed: 16557505
Implement Sci. 2018 Nov 22;13(1):143
pubmed: 30466450
Implement Sci. 2013 May 08;8:49
pubmed: 23656884
Am J Community Psychol. 2012 Dec;50(3-4):462-80
pubmed: 22644083
Implement Sci. 2010 Feb 12;5:16
pubmed: 21080976

Auteurs

Rosmin Esmail (R)

Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3D14A Teaching and Wellness Building, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada.
Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
O'Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Department of Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.

Heather M Hanson (HM)

Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3D14A Teaching and Wellness Building, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada.
Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Jayna Holroyd-Leduc (J)

Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3D14A Teaching and Wellness Building, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada.
Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
O'Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Department of Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.
Hotchkiss Brain Institute, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Sage Brown (S)

Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3D14A Teaching and Wellness Building, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada.
Health Technology Assessment Unit, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Lisa Strifler (L)

Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Sharon E Straus (SE)

Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Daniel J Niven (DJ)

Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3D14A Teaching and Wellness Building, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada.
Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
O'Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Department of Critical Care Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Fiona M Clement (FM)

Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3D14A Teaching and Wellness Building, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada. fclement@ucalgary.ca.
O'Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. fclement@ucalgary.ca.
Health Technology Assessment Unit, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. fclement@ucalgary.ca.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH