Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30348180›Full record

ArticleHealth research policy and systems2018

Knowledge translation for realist reviews: a participatory approach for a review on scaling up complex interventions.

Jennifer A Boyko, Barbara L Riley, Cameron D Willis, Lisa Stockton, Dana Zummach, Jon Kerner, Kerry Robinson, Marie Chia

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health research policy and systems, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. 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

8 authors.

Jennifer A BoykoPropel Centre for Population Health Impact, University of Waterloo, 200 University Ave West, Waterloo, ON, N2L 3G1, Canada. j3boyko@uwaterloo.ca.
Barbara L RileyPropel Centre for Population Health Impact, University of Waterloo, 200 University Ave West, Waterloo, ON, N2L 3G1, Canada.
Cameron D WillisMovember Foundation, P.O. Box 60, East Melbourne, VIC, 8002, Australia.
Lisa StocktonPropel Centre for Population Health Impact, University of Waterloo, 200 University Ave West, Waterloo, ON, N2L 3G1, Canada.
Dana ZummachPropel Centre for Population Health Impact, University of Waterloo, 200 University Ave West, Waterloo, ON, N2L 3G1, Canada.
Jon KernerCanadian Partnership Against Cancer, 145 King Street West Suite 900, Toronto, ON, M5H 1J8, Canada.
Kerry RobinsonPublic Health Agency of Canada, 130 Colonnade Road A.L. 6501H, Ottawa, ON, K1A 0K9, Canada.
Marie ChiaPublic Health Agency of Canada, 130 Colonnade Road A.L. 6501H, Ottawa, ON, K1A 0K9, Canada.

Funding

Canadian Cancer Society 2011-701019Canadian Institutes of Health Research CIHR PCS-138841
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundKnowledge syntheses that use a realist methodology are gaining popularity. Yet, there are few reports in the literature that describe how results are summarised, shared and used. This paper aims to inform knowledge translation (KT) for realist reviews by describing the process of developing a KT strategy for a review on pathways for scaling up complex public health interventions.

methodsThe participatory approach used for the realist review was also used to develop the KT strategy. The approach included three main steps, namely (1) an international meeting focused on interpreting preliminary findings from the realist review and seeking input on KT activities; (2) a targeted literature review on KT for realist reviews; and (3) consultations with primary knowledge users of the review.

resultsThe international meeting identified a general preference among knowledge users for findings from the review that are action oriented. A need was also identified for understanding how to tailor findings for specific knowledge user groups in relation to their needs. The literature review identified four papers that included brief descriptions of planned or actual KT activities for specific research studies; however, information was minimal on what KT activities or products work for whom, under what conditions and why. The consultations revealed that KT for realist reviews should consider the following: (1) activities closely aligned with the preferences of specific knowledge user groups; (2) key findings that are sensitive to factors within the knowledge user's context; and (3) actionable statements that can advance KT goals, activities or products. The KT strategy derived from the three activities includes a planning framework and tailored KT activities that address preferences of knowledge users for findings that are action oriented and context relevant.

conclusionsThis paper provides an example of a KT strategy for realist reviews that blends theoretical and practical insights. Evaluation of the strategy's implementation will provide useful insights on its effectiveness and potential for broader application.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareHealth PlanningPublic HealthResearch DesignReview Literature as TopicStakeholder ParticipationTranslational Research, BiomedicalDecision MakingEvidence-Based MedicineHumansKnowledgePopulation HealthProblem Solvingchronic disease preventioncomplex interventionsevidence-informed decision-makingknowledge translationpopulation healthpublic healthrealist reviewsscaling upsystem planning

Identifiers

PMID30348180
PMCPMC6198505

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.