ArticleHealth research policy and systems2020
Flipping the paradigm: a qualitative exploration of research translation centres in the United Kingdom and Australia.
Article in Health research policy and systems, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Factors supporting research capacity development in an English local authority: a qualitative description and comparison with proposed mechanisms.Health research policy and systems · 2026Article
- Early career research capacity-building for the health and social care workforce: process evaluation of internships and fellowships provided through a research-practice partnership.Health research policy and systems · 2026Article
- Policy context and digital development: a comparative study of trajectories in 4 Canadian academic health centers over 30 years.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025Article
- Transforming dementia research into practice: a multiple case study of academic research utilization strategies in Dutch Alzheimer Centres.Health research policy and systems · 2025Article
- Learning health systems to implement chronic disease prevention programs: A novel framework and perspectives from an Australian health service.Learning health systems · 2024Article
- Models and approaches for building knowledge translation capacity and capability in health services: a scoping review.Implementation science : IS · 2024Article
- Producing knowledge together: a participatory approach to synthesising research across a large-scale collaboration in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health.Health research policy and systems · 2024Review
- Translating, Contexting, and Institutionalising Knowledge Translation Practices in Northern Australia: Some Reflections Comment on "Sustaining Knowledge Translation Practices: A Critical Interpretive Synthesis".International journal of health policy and management · 2023Article
- Academic health science centre models across the developing countries and lessons for implementation in Indonesia: a scoping review.BMJ open · 2022Article
- When Health Systems Consider Research to Be Beyond the Scope of Healthcare Delivery, Research Translation Is Crippled Comment on "Academic Health Science Centres as Vehicles for Knowledge Mobilisation in Australia? A Qualitative Study".International journal of health policy and management · 2022Article
- Integrating the complexity of healthcare improvement with implementation science: a longitudinal qualitative case study.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- "There hasn't been a career structure to step into": a qualitative study on perceptions of allied health clinician researcher careers.Health research policy and systems · 2022Article
- Methods to Generate Innovative Research Ideas and Improve Patient and Public Involvement in Modern Epidemiological Research: Review, Patient Viewpoint, and Guidelines for Implementation of a Digital Cohort Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Review
- Using institutional entrepreneurship to understand the role of innovation teams in healthcare: a longitudinal qualitative study.BMJ open · 2021Article
- A Learning Health System Framework to Operationalize Health Data to Improve Quality Care: An Australian Perspective.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Article
- Pressure Injury Surveillance and Prevention in Australia: Monash Partners Capacity Building Framework.Frontiers in public health · 2021Article
- Leaders' perspectives on learning health systems: a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOver the past decade, Research Translation Centres (RTCs) have been established in many countries. These centres (sometimes referred to as Academic Health Science Centres) are designed to bring universities and healthcare providers together in order to accelerate the generation and translation of new evidence that is responsive to health service and community priorities. This has the potential to effectively 'flip' the traditional research and education paradigms because it requires active participation and continuous engagement with stakeholders (especially service users, the community and frontline clinicians). Although investment and expectations of RTCs are high, the literature confirms a need to better understand the processes that RTCs use to mobilise knowledge, build workforce capacity, and co-produce research with patients and the public to ensure population impact and drive healthcare improvement.
methodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted with selected leaders and members from select RTCs in England and Australia. Convenience sampling was utilised to identify RTCs, based on their geography, accessibility and availability. Purposive sampling and a snowballing approach were employed to recruit individual participants for interviews, which were conducted face to face or via videoconferencing. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using a reflexive and inductive approach. This involved two researchers comparing codes and interrogating themes that were analysed inductively against the study aims and through meetings with the research team.
resultsA total of 41 participants, 22 from England and 19 from Australia were interviewed. Five major themes emerged, including (1) dissonant metrics, (2) different models of leadership, (3) public and patient involvement and research co-production, (4) workforce development and (5) barriers to collaboration.
conclusionsParticipants identified the need for performance measures that capture community impact. Better aligned success metrics, enhanced leadership, strategies to partner with patients and the public, enhanced workforce development and strategies to enhance collaboration were all identified as crucial for RTCs to succeed.
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.