Bridging the gap between research evidence and its implementation in public health practice: case studies of embedded research model.
Co-production
Embedded research
Public health
Research evidence- implementation gap
Research-based evidence
Journal
BMC public health
ISSN: 1471-2458
Titre abrégé: BMC Public Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968562
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
13 May 2024
13 May 2024
Historique:
received:
05
01
2024
accepted:
28
04
2024
medline:
14
5
2024
pubmed:
14
5
2024
entrez:
13
5
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To investigate the potential of embedded research in bridging the gap between research evidence and its implementation in public health practice. Using a case study methodology, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 4 embedded researchers, 9 public health practitioners, and 4 other stakeholders (2 teachers and 2 students) across four case study sites. Sites and individuals were purposively selected. Sites included two local authorities, one secondary school, and one sports organisation. Thematic data analysis was adopted to analyse the qualitative data. Four themes were identified: (1) building and maintaining relationships, (2) working with stakeholders, (3) informing practice, and (4) critical reflection. Embedded researchers build and maintain relationships with practitioners and other stakeholders to produce research. Evidence from the co-produced research informs future practice and research to improve service and delivery rendered to the public. Thus, embedded researchers use their role to bridge the research evidence - implementation gap in public health practice.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38741039
doi: 10.1186/s12889-024-18727-z
pii: 10.1186/s12889-024-18727-z
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1299Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Lobb R, Colditz GA. Implementation science and its application to population health. Annu Rev Public Health. 2013;34:235–51.
pubmed: 23297655
pmcid: 3901430
doi: 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-031912-114444
Di Ruggiero E, Viehbeck S, Greyson D. Knowledge utilization and exchange. Oxford: Oxford University Press—Oxford Bibliographies in Public Health; 2017.
Marshall M, Pagel C, French C, Utley M, Allwood D, Fulop N, Pope C, Banks V, Goldman A. Moving improvement research closer to practice: the researcher in residence model. BMJ Qual Saf. 2014;23:801–5.
pubmed: 24894592
pmcid: 4173968
doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2013-002779
Chew S, Armstrong N, Martin G. Institutionalising knowledge brokering as a sustainable knowledge translation solution in healthcare: how can it work in practice? Evid Policy. 2013;9:335–51.
doi: 10.1332/174426413X662734
Proudfoot A, Mcauley D, Hind M, Griffith M. Translational research: what does it means, what has it delivered and what it might deliver? Curr Opin Crit Care. 2011;17:495–503.
pubmed: 21825976
doi: 10.1097/MCC.0b013e32834a4b19
Albert MA, Fretheim A, Maiga D. Factors influencing the utilization of research findings by health policymakers in a developing country: the selection of mali’s essential medicines. Health Res Policy Syst. 2007;5:2.
pubmed: 17338810
pmcid: 1820594
doi: 10.1186/1478-4505-5-2
Armstrong R, Doyle J, Lamb C, Waters E. Multi-sectoral health promotion and public health: the role of evidence. J Public Health. 2006;28(2):168–72.
doi: 10.1093/pubmed/fdl013
Bunn F. Strategies to promote the impact of systematic reviews on healthcare policy: a systematic review of the literature. Evid Policy. 2011;7:428.
doi: 10.1332/174426411X603434
Allen T, Grace C, Martin S. From analysis to action: connecting research and local government in an age of austerity. Report of the local government knowledge navigator. London: Local Government Association; 2014.
Campbell D, Donald B, Moore G, Frew D. Evidence check: knowledge brokering to commission research reviews for policy. Evid Policy. 2011;7(1):97–107.
doi: 10.1332/174426411X553034
Dobbins M, Robeson P, Ciliska D, Hanna S, Cameron R, O’mara L, et al. A description of a Knowledge Broker Role implemented as part of a randomized controlled trial evaluating three knowledge translation strategies. Implement Sci. 2009;4:23.
pubmed: 19397820
pmcid: 2680804
doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-4-23
Friese B, Bogenschneider K. The Voice of experience: how social scientists communicate family research to policymakers. Fam Relat. 2009;58(2):229–43.
pubmed: 20407597
pmcid: 2856091
doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3729.2008.00549.x
Newbury-birch D, Allan K. Co-creating and co-producing Research evidence: a guide for practitioners and academics in Health, Social Care and Education Settings. London and New York: Routledge; 2019.
doi: 10.4324/9781351263009
Van der graaf P, Forrest L, Adams J, Shucksmith J, White M. How do public health professionals view and engage with research? A qualitative interview study and stakeholder workshop engaging public health professionals and researchers. BMC Public Health. 2017;17:892.
pubmed: 29166894
pmcid: 5700655
doi: 10.1186/s12889-017-4896-1
Hobin EP, Riley B, Hayward S, Ruggiero ED, Birdsell J. Maximising the use of evidence: exploring the Intersection between Population health intervention research and knowledge translation from a Canadian perspective. Evid Policy. 2012;8(1):97–115.
doi: 10.1332/174426412X620155
Oliver K, Kothari A, Mays N. The dark side of coproduction: do the costs outweigh the benefits for health research? Health Res Policy Syst. 2019;17:33.
pubmed: 30922339
pmcid: 6437844
doi: 10.1186/s12961-019-0432-3
Wong S. Tales from the frontline: the experiences of early childhood practitioners working with an ‘Embedded’ research team. Eval Program Plann. 2009;32:99–108.
pubmed: 19036451
doi: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2008.10.003
Fathimath S, David E, Helen B. Nurses’ perceptions of barriers and facilitators to implement EBP in the Maldives. Adv Nurs. 2014;2014:7. Article ID 698604.
Aszkenasy OM, Dawson D, Gill M, Haines A, Patterson DLH. Audit of direct access cardiac investigations: experience in an inner london health district. J R Soc Med. 1994;87:588–90.
pubmed: 7966104
pmcid: 1294846
doi: 10.1177/014107689408701006
Davis DA, Thomson MA, Oxman AD, Haynes RB. Changing physician performance: a systematic review of the effect of educational strategies. J Am Med Assoc. 1995;274:700–5.
doi: 10.1001/jama.1995.03530090032018
Sutton M. How to get the best health outcome for a given amount of money. BMJ. 1997;1997(315):47–9.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.315.7099.47
Rycroft-malone J. From knowing to doing: from the academy to practice, comment on the many meanings of evidence: implications for the translational science agenda in healthcare. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2014;2:1–2.
doi: 10.15171/ijhpm.2014.08
Walshe K, Davies H. Health research, development and innovation in England from 1988 to 2013: from Research production to knowledge mobilization. J Health Serv Res. 2013;18:1–12.
doi: 10.1177/1355819613502011
Ryan B. Coproduction: option or obligation? Aust J Public Adm. 2012;71:314–24.
doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8500.2012.00780.x
Groundwater-smith S, Mockler N. The knowledge building school: from the outside in, from the inside out. Change Transform Educ. 2002;5:15–24.
Himmrich J. How should academics interact with policy makers? Lessons on building a long-term advocacy strategy. LSE Impact Blog. 2016. Available at: How should academics interact with policy makers? Lessons on building a long-term advocacy strategy. | Impact of Social Sciences (lse.ac.uk). Accessed 15/01/2022.
Zevallos Z. Protecting activist academics against public harassment. Other Sociologist. 2017. Available at: Protecting Activist Academics Against Public Harassment – The Other Sociologist. Accessed 15/01/2022.
Davey SG, Ebrahim S, Frankel S. How policy informs the evidence. BMJ. 2001;322(7280):184–5.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.322.7280.184
Maybin J. How proximity and trust are key factors in getting research to feed into policymaking. LSE Impact Blog. 2016. Available at: How proximity and trust are key factors in getting research to feed into policymaking | Impact of Social Sciences (lse.ac.uk). Accessed 15/01/2022.
Rycroft-malone J, Burton CR, Bucknall T, Graham ID, Hutchinson AM, Stacey D. Collaboration and co-production of knowledge in healthcare: opportunities and challenges. Int J Health Policy Manage. 2016;5(4):221–3.
doi: 10.15171/ijhpm.2016.08
Hegger D, Dieperink C. Toward successful joint knowledge production for Climate Change Adaptation: lessons from six Regional projects in the Netherlands. Ecol Soc. 2014;19(2):34.
doi: 10.5751/ES-06453-190234
Brannick T, Coghlan D. Defense of being native: the case for insider academic research. Organ Res Methods. 2007;10:59–74.
doi: 10.1177/1094428106289253
Langeveld K, Stronks K, Harting J. Use of a Knowledge Broker to establish healthy public policies in a city district: a developmental evaluation. BMC Public Health. 2016;16:271.
pubmed: 26979063
pmcid: 4793512
doi: 10.1186/s12889-016-2832-4
Yost J, Dobbins M, Traynor R, Decorby K, Workentine S, Greco L. Tools to support evidence-informed public health decision making. BMC Public Health. 2014;14:728.
pubmed: 25034534
pmcid: 4223550
doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-14-728
Smith LS, Wilkins N. Mind the gap: approaches to addressing the research-to-practice, practice-to-research chasm. J Public Health Manage Pract. 2018;24:S6–11.
doi: 10.1097/PHH.0000000000000667
Mcginity R, Salokangas M. Introduction: “Embedded Research” as an Approach into academia for emerging researchers. Management in Education. 2014;28:3–5.
doi: 10.1177/0892020613508863
Dixon-woods M, Martin G. Does quality improvement improve quality? Future. Hosp J. 2016;3:191–4.
Dixon-woods M, Mcnicol S, Martin G. Ten challenges in improving quality in healthcare: lessons from the Health foundation’s programme evaluations and relevant literature. BMJ Qual Saf. 2012;21:876–84.
pubmed: 22543475
pmcid: 3461644
doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2011-000760
Vindrola-padros C, Eyre L, Baxter H, et al. Addressing the challenges of knowledge co-production in quality improvement: learning from the implementation of the researcher-in-residence model. BMJ Qual Saf. 2019;28:67–73.
pubmed: 29866766
doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2017-007127
Polit D, Beck C. Generalization in quantitative and qualitative research: myths and strategies. Int J Nurs Stud. 2010;47:1451–8.
pubmed: 20598692
doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2010.06.004
Jenkins EK, Slemon A, Haines-saah RJ, Oliffe J. A Guide to multisite qualitative analysis. Qual Health Res. 2018;28(12):1969–77.
pubmed: 30024317
doi: 10.1177/1049732318786703
Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101.
doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Hayden MC, Waller G, Hodgson A, Brown S, Harris S, Miller K, Barber D, Hudson L, Newbury-Birch D. ‘Pupils, Teachers and Academics Working Together on a Research Project Examining How Students and Teachers Feel About the New GCSEs’, in Newbury-Birch and Allan. Co-creating and Co-producing Research Evidence: A Guide for Practitioners and Academics in Health, Social Care and Education Settings. London and New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group; 2019.
Lewis S, Russell A. Being embedded: a way forward for ethnographic research. Ethnography. 2011;12:398–416.
doi: 10.1177/1466138110393786
Rowley H. Going beyond procedure: engaging with the ethical complexities of being an embedded researcher. Manage Educ. 2014;28:19–24.
Embedded research. https://www.embeddedresearch.org.uk . (No date). Accessed 22 Nov 2023.
Jenness V. Pluto, prisons, and plaintiffs: notes on systematic back-translation from an embedded researcher. Soc Probl. 2008;55:1–22.
doi: 10.1525/sp.2008.55.1.1
Duggan J. Critical friendship and critical orphanship: embedded research of an english local authority initiative. Manage Educ. 2014;28(1):12–8.
Denzin N. The Research Act: A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological Methods (2nd edition). New York: McGraw Hill; 1978.