Realist process evaluation of the knowledge translation programme of a patient-oriented research network.
childhood disabilities
integrated knowledge translation
knowledge mobilization
patient‐oriented research
process evaluation
realist evaluation
Journal
Journal of evaluation in clinical practice
ISSN: 1365-2753
Titre abrégé: J Eval Clin Pract
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9609066
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
29 Jun 2024
29 Jun 2024
Historique:
received:
18
02
2024
accepted:
02
06
2024
medline:
29
6
2024
pubmed:
29
6
2024
entrez:
29
6
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
The Knowledge Translation (KT) Programme of a pan-Canadian strategic patient-oriented research network focused on brain-based developmental disabilities aimed to mobilize knowledge relevant to the network members. The programme also promotes and studies integrated Knowledge Translation (iKT) approaches involving different interested parties, such as researchers, patient-partners and decision-makers, in all parts of the knowledge creation process. The objective of this study is to advance research programme evaluation methods through a realist evaluation of the process of implementing iKT activities. Realist process evaluation included: (1) development of initial programme theories (using the partnership synergy theory); (2) data collection and analysis; (3) synthesis and refinement of theories through engagement with literature; and (4) presentation of findings in context-mechanism-outcome (C-M-O) configurations. A range of project documentation records were reviewed for analysis, and three co-leads, a programme coordinator, and a senior research associate were consulted to contextualize the implementation process of relevant KT activities. Based on the developed C-M-O configurations, we identified five key mechanisms of generating synergy in the iKT processes: (1) Visible shared leadership that embodies what iKT looks like; (2) Researchers' readiness for iKT; (3) Adaptation and flexible allocation of resources to emerging needs; (4) Power sharing to create practical and creative knowledge; and (5) Collective voice for potential transformative impacts at the policy level. The current realist evaluation demonstrated how partnerships between researchers, patient-partners and other interested parties can synergistically generate new ways of thinking among all interested parties, actionable strategies to integrate users in research, and solutions to disseminate knowledge. In particular, we identified a pivotal role for patient-partners to act as equal decision-maker helps building and maintaining partnerships and consolidating KT strategies.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : CIHR
Pays : Canada
Informations de copyright
© 2024 The Author(s). Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Kothari A, McCutcheon C, Graham ID. Defining integrated knowledge translation and moving forward: a response to recent commentaries. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2017;6:299‐300. doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2017.15
Graham ID, McCutcheon C, Kothari A. Exploring the frontiers of research co‐production: the Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network concept papers. Health Res Policy Sys. 2019:17:88. doi:10.1186/s12961-019-0501-7
Crosschild C, Huynh N, De Sousa I, Bawafaa E, Brown H. Where is critical analysis of power and positionality in knowledge translation? Health Res Policy Syst. 2021;19:92.
Banner D, Bains M, Carroll S, et al. Patient and public engagement in integrated knowledge translation research: are we there yet? Res Involv Engagem. 2019;5:8.
Nguyen T, Graham ID, Mrklas KJ, et al. How does integrated knowledge translation (IKT) compare to other collaborative research approaches to generating and translating knowledge? Learning from experts in the field. Health Res Policy Syst. 2020;18:35.
Kothari A, Wathen CN. A critical second look at integrated knowledge translation. Health Policy. 2013;109:187‐191.
Boland L, Kothari A, McCutcheon C, Graham ID. Building an integrated knowledge translation (IKT) evidence base: colloquium proceedings and research direction. Health Res Policy Syst. 2020;18:8.
Gagliardi AR, Berta W, Kothari A, Boyko J, Urquhart R. Integrated knowledge translation (IKT) in health care: a scoping review. Implement Sci. 2016;11:38. doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0399-1
Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2008;337:a1655. doi:10.1136/bmj.a1655
Kreindler SA. Advancing the evaluation of integrated knowledge translation. Health Res Policy Syst. 2018;16:104.
Haynes A, Brennan S, Redman S, et al. Policymakers' experience of a capacity‐building intervention designed to increase their use of research: a realist process evaluation. Health Res Policy Syst. 2017;15:99.
Salter KL, Kothari A. Using realist evaluation to open the black box of knowledge translation: a state‐of‐the‐art review. Implement Sci. 2014;9:115.
Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic evaluation. sage; 1997.
Gilmore B, McAuliffe E, Power J, Vallières F. Data analysis and synthesis within a realist evaluation: toward more transparent methodological approaches. Int J Qual Methods. 2019;18:160940691985975.
Haynes A, Gilchrist H, Oliveira JS, Tiedemann A. Using realist evaluation to understand process outcomes in a COVID‐19‐impacted yoga intervention trial: a worked example. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18:9065.
Punton M, Vogel I, Lloyd R Reflections from a realist evaluation in progress: scaling ladders and stitching theory (CDI Practice paper). 2016;18:1‐11
Jagosh J, Macaulay AC, Pluye P, et al. Uncovering the benefits of participatory research: implications of a realist review for health research and practice. Milbank Q. 2012;90:311‐346.
Wong G, Westhrop G, Pawson R, et al. Realist synthesis: rameses training materials. 2013. Accessed on April 28, 2023. https://www.ramesesproject.org/media/Realist_reviews_training_materials.pdf
Frykman M, von Thiele Schwarz U, Muntlin Athlin Å, Hasson H, Mazzocato P. The work is never ending: uncovering teamwork sustainability using realistic evaluation. J Health Organ Manag. 2017;31:64‐81.
Lasker RD, Weiss ES. Creating partnership synergy: the critical role of community stakeholders. J Health Hum Serv Adm. 2003;26:119‐139.
Lasker RD, Weiss ES, Miller R. Partnership synergy: a practical framework for studying and strengthening the collaborative advantage. Milbank Q. 2001;79:179‐205.
Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE, Kirsh SR, Alexander JA, Lowery JC. Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implement Sci. 2009;4:50.
Smith JD, Li DH, Rafferty MR. The implementation research logic model: a method for planning, executing, reporting, and synthesizing implementation projects. Implement Sci. 2020;15:84.
CHILD‐BRIGHT Network. Report to Community 2019‐2020. CHILD‐BRIGHT Network; 2020.
CHILD‐BRIGHT Network. Report to Community 2018‐2019. CHILD‐BRIGHT Network; 2019.
Yamaguchi S, Zerbo A, Putterman C, et al. Evolving partnerships for building communities: experiences from the Knowledge Translation Innovation Incubator. How We Work Together: The Integrated Knowledge Translation Casebook. Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network; 2022:34‐38.
Sens.és Making. CHILD‐BRIGHT KT Innovation Incubator Final Report (Unpublished). Sens.és Making; 2021.
CommuniKIDS. CHILD‐BRIGHT KT Innovation Incubator Midterm Report (Unpublished). CommuniKIDS; 2022.
Children First Canada. Raising Canada 2022‐Top 10 Threats to Childhood in Canada. Children First Canada; 2022.
Gonzalez M, Yusuf A, Steiman M, et al. The Global report on developmental delays, disorders and disabilities‐Canada (Report submitted to the Steering Group for the UNICEF and World Health Organization Global report on developmental delays, disorders and disabilities) 2021.
Majnemer A, McGrath PJ, Baumbusch J, et al. Time to be counted: COVID‐19 and intellectual and developmental disabilities—An RSC Policy Briefing. Facets. 6(1):1337‐1389.
Spyridonidis D, Hendy J, Barlow J. Leadership for knowledge translation: the case of CLAHRCs. Qual Health Res. 2015;25:1492‐1505.
Loban E, Scott C, Lewis V, et al. Activating partnership assets to produce synergy in primary health care: a mixed methods study. Healthcare. MDPI; 2021:1060.
Camden C, Shikako‐Thomas K, Nguyen T, et al. Engaging stakeholders in rehabilitation research: a scoping review of strategies used in partnerships and evaluation of impacts. Disabil Rehabil. 2015;37:1390‐1400.
Jagosh J, Bush PL, Salsberg J, et al. A realist evaluation of community‐based participatory research: partnership synergy, trust building and related ripple effects. BMC Public Health. 2015;15:725.
Heckert A, Forsythe LP, Carman KL, et al. Researchers, patients, and other stakeholders' perspectives on challenges to and strategies for engagement. Res Involv Engagem. 2020;6:60.
Cassidy CE, Shin HD, Ramage E, et al. Trainee‐led research using an integrated knowledge translation or other research partnership approaches: a scoping review. Health Res Policy Syst. 2021;19:135.
Bowen S, Botting I, Graham ID, et al. Experience of health leadership in partnering with university‐based researchers in Canada—a call to “Re‐imagine” research. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2019;8:684‐699. doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2019.66
Vindrola‐Padros C. Can we Re‐imagine research so it is timely, relevant and responsive? Comment on "Experience of Health Leadership in Partnering With University‐Based Researchers in Canada: a Call to ‘Re‐Imagine’ Research”. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2021;10:172‐175.
Graham ID, Logan J, Harrison MB, et al. Lost in knowledge translation: time for a map? Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions. 2006;26:13‐24.
Field B, Booth A, Ilott I, Gerrish K. Using the knowledge to action framework in practice: a citation analysis and systematic review. Implement Sci. 2014;9:172.
Black A, Strain K, Wallsworth C, et al. What constitutes meaningful engagement for patients and families as partners on research teams? J Health Serv Res Policy. 2018;23:158‐167.
Jones J, Barry MM. Exploring the relationship between synergy and partnership functioning factors in health promotion partnerships. Health Promot Int. 2011;26:408‐420.
Goodman MS, Ackermann N, Bowen DJ, Thompson V. Content validation of a quantitative stakeholder engagement measure. J Community Psychol. 2019;47:1937‐1951. doi:10.1002/jcop.22239
Bowen D, Hyams T, Goodman M, West K, Harris‐Wai J, Yu JH. Systematic review of quantitative measures of stakeholder engagement. Clin Transl Sci. 2017;10:314‐336. doi:10.1111/cts.12474
Gonzalez M, Ogourtsova T, Zerbo A, et al. Patient Engagement in CHILD‐BRIGHT's Patient‐Oriented Research Network: Scratching Beneath the Surface. Research brief submitted to CHILD‐BRIGHT's Measuring Patient Engagement Working Group; 2022.
Yamaguchi S, Costello C, Lalonde C, McCarry S, Majnemer A, Shikako K. Supporting families and caregivers of children with disabilities through a parent peer mentor (PPM): experiences from a patient‐oriented research network. Res Involv Engagem. 2023;9:78.