ReviewImplementation science : IS2014
How research funding agencies support science integration into policy and practice: an international overview.
Review in Implementation science : IS, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
42 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Gender differences in faculty rank among academic physicians: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2021Pooled it
- Building capacity in dissemination and implementation science: a systematic review of the academic literature on teaching and training initiatives.Implementation science : IS · 2020Pooled it
- The essential elements for successful implementation of nature therapy programs in mental health services: a systematic review with narrative synthesis.Implementation science communications · 2026Review
- Translating one health research evidence into action: co-production of rabies control knowledge in Côte d'Ivoire.Health research policy and systems · 2026Article
- Bridging research and practice for dementia care: strategies and challenges of public and private funders in the dissemination and implementation of dementia research.Health research policy and systems · 2026Article
- Bibliometric Analysis of Highly-Cited Papers ofIndian journal of orthopaedics · 2026Review
- An evidence-informed, community-engaged approach to designing a large-scale, impact-oriented research funding initiative to foster the implementation of transformative integrated care: a multi-methods qualitative study.Implementation science communications · 2025Article
- A qualitative exploration of disseminating research findings among public health researchers in China.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Understanding the unique and common perspectives of partners engaged in knowledge mobilization activities within pediatric pain management: a mixed methods study.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Facilitating Evidence-Based Practice among Nurses in a Tertiary General Hospital: A Six-Year Practice of an Implementation Strategy Informed by the i-PARIHS Framework.Journal of nursing management · 2024Article
- Connections between health research systems and decision-making spaces: lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic in the province of Québec, Canada.Health research policy and systems · 2023Article
- Are public health researchers designing for dissemination? Findings from a national survey in China.Implementation science communications · 2023Article
- A Program Evaluation of a Dietary Sodium Reduction Research Consortium of Five Low- and Middle-Income Countries in Latin America.Nutrients · 2022Article
- What funders are doing to assess the impact of their investments in health and biomedical research.Health research policy and systems · 2022Review
- Funders' Perspectives on Supporting Implementation Research in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.Global health, science and practice · 2022Article
- Health funders' dissemination and implementation practices: results from a survey of the Ensuring Value in Research (EViR) Funders' Forum.Implementation science communications · 2022Article
- Evidence-based practice implementation in healthcare in China: a living scoping review.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2022Article
- Implementation mapping for tobacco cessation in a federally qualified health center.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Building partnerships: A case study of physical activity researchers and practitioners collaborating to build evidence to inform the delivery of a workplace step count challenge.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2022Article
- Advocacy, activism, and lobbying: How variations in interpretation affects ability for academia to engage with public policy.PLOS global public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFunding agencies constitute one essential pillar for policy makers, researchers and health service delivery institutions. Such agencies are increasingly providing support for science implementation. In this paper, we investigate health research funding agencies and how they support the integration of science into policy, and of science into practice, and vice versa.
methodsWe selected six countries: Australia, The Netherlands, France, Canada, England and the United States. For 13 funding agencies, we compared their intentions to support, their actions related to science integration into policy and practice, and the reported benefits of this integration. We did a qualitative content analysis of the reports and information provided on the funding agencies' websites.
resultsMost funding agencies emphasized the importance of science integration into policy and practice in their strategic orientation, and stated how this integration was structured. Their funding activities were embedded in the push, pull, or linkage/exchange knowledge transfer model. However, few program funding efforts were based on all three models. The agencies reported more often on the benefits of integration on practice, rather than on policy. External programs that were funded largely covered science integration into policy and practice at the end of grant stage, while overlooking the initial stages. Finally, external funding actions were more prominent than internally initiated bridging activities and training activities on such integration.
conclusionsThis paper contributes to research on science implementation because it goes beyond the two community model of researchers versus end users, to include funding agencies. Users of knowledge may be end users in health organizations like hospitals; civil servants assigned to decision making positions within funding agencies; civil servants outside of the Ministry of Health, such as the Ministry of the Environment; politicians deciding on health-related legislation; or even university researchers whose work builds on previous research. This heterogeneous sample of users may require different user-specific mechanisms for research initiation, development and dissemination. This paper builds the foundation for further discussion on science implementation from the perspective of funding agencies in the health field. In general, case studies can help in identifying best practices for evidence-informed decision making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.