Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26353835›Full record

ArticleBMC research notes2015

An exploratory analysis of the nature of informal knowledge underlying theories of planned action used for public health oriented knowledge translation.

Anita Kothari, Jennifer A Boyko, Andrea Campbell-Davison

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC research notes, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Anita KothariSchool of Health Studies, Western University, Labatt Health Sciences Building, Room 222, London, ON, N6A 5B9, Canada. akothari@uwo.ca.
Jennifer A BoykoSchool of Health Studies, Faculty of Health Sciences, and Faculty of Information and Media Studies, Western University, Labatt Health Sciences Building, Room 403, London, ON, N6A 5B9, Canada. jboyko@uwo.ca.
Andrea Campbell-DavisonFaculty of Information and Media Studies, Western University, 1151 Richmond St., London, ON, N6A 3K7, Canada. acampb56@hotmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInformal knowledge is used in public health practice to make sense of research findings. Although knowledge translation theories highlight the importance of informal knowledge, it is not clear to what extent the same literature provides guidance in terms of how to use it in practice. The objective of this study was to address this gap by exploring what planned action theories suggest in terms of using three types of informal knowledge: local, experiential and expert. We carried out an exploratory secondary analysis of the planned action theories that informed the development of a popular knowledge translation theory. Our sample included twenty-nine (n = 29) papers. We extracted information from these papers about sources of and guidance for using informal knowledge, and then carried out a thematic analysis.

resultsWe found that theories of planned action provide guidance (including sources of, methods for identifying, and suggestions for use) for using local, experiential and expert knowledge.

conclusionThis study builds on previous knowledge translation related work to provide insight into the practical use of informal knowledge. Public health practitioners can refer to the guidance summarized in this paper to inform their decision-making. Further research about how to use informal knowledge in public health practice is needed given the value being accorded to using informal knowledge in public health decision-making processes.

Indexed as

Evidence-Based PracticeHealth Planning CouncilsHealth PolicyHealth PrioritiesHealth PromotionHumansInformation DisseminationPublic HealthPublic Health PracticeTranslational Research, Biomedical

Identifiers

PMID26353835
PMCPMC4565051

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.