Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33985591›Full record

ArticleImplementation science communications2021

Organizational supports for knowledge translation in paediatric health centres and research institutes: insights from a Canadian environmental scan.

Stephanie Miranda Nadine Glegg, Andrea Ryce, Kimberly J Miller, Laura Nimmon, Anita Kothari, Liisa Holsti

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science communications, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

6 authors.

Stephanie Miranda Nadine GleggRehabilitation Sciences, The University of British Columbia, T325 2211 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 2B5, Canada. sglegg@cw.bc.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8164-6983
Andrea RyceSunny Hill Health Centre at BC Children's Hospital, 4500 Oak Street, Vancouver, BC, V6H 3N1, Canada.
Kimberly J MillerSunny Hill Health Centre at BC Children's Hospital, 4500 Oak Street, Vancouver, BC, V6H 3N1, Canada.
Laura NimmonDepartment of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, The University of British Columbia, T325 2211 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 2B5, Canada.
Anita KothariSchool of Health Studies, Western University, 1151 Richmond Street, London, Ontario, N6A 3K7, Canada.
Liisa HolstiBC Children's Hospital Research Institute, 938 W. 28th Ave, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 4H4, Canada.

Funding

CIHR Canada Research Chair
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOrganizational supports are thought to help address wide-ranging barriers to evidence-informed health care (EIHC) and knowledge translation (KT). However, little is known about the nature of the resources and services that exist within paediatric health care and research settings across Canada to facilitate evidence use in health care delivery. This survey examined existing supports for EIHC/KT within these organizations to inform the design of similar EIHC/KT support programmes.

methodsA national environmental scan was conducted using a bilingual online survey distributed to leaders at Canadian paediatric academic health science centres and their affiliated research institutes. Participants were invited through email, social media and webinar invitations and snowball sampling. Supports of interest included personnel, resources, services, organizational structures or processes, and partnerships or collaborations; barriers and successes were also probed. Data were compiled by site, reported using descriptive statistics, or grouped thematically. Supports were described using the AIMD (Aims, Ingredients, Mechanism, Delivery) framework.

resultsThirty-one respondents from 17 sites across seven provinces represented a 49% site response rate. Eleven (65%) sites reported an on-site library with variable staffing and services. Ten (59%) sites reported a dedicated KT support unit or staff person. Supports ranged from education, resource development and consultation to protocol development, funded initiatives and collaborations. Organizations leveraged internal and external supports, with the majority also employing supports for clinical research integration. Supports perceived as most effective included personnel, targeted initiatives, leadership, interdepartmental expertise, external drivers and logistical support. Barriers included operational constraints, individual-level factors and lack of infrastructure.

conclusionsThis first survey of organizational supports for EIHC/KT identified the range of supports in place in paediatric research and health care organizations across Canada. The diversity of supports reported across sites may reflect differences in resource capacity and objectives. Similarities in EIHC/KT and research integration supports suggest common infrastructure may be feasible. Moreover, stakeholder engagement in research was common, but not pervasive. Tailored support programmes can target multi-faceted barriers. Findings can inform the development, refinement and evaluation of EIHC/KT support programmes and guide the study of the effectiveness and sustainability of these strategies.

Indexed as

Evidence-informed health careInfrastructure, environmental scanKnowledge translationOrganizational supports

Identifiers

PMID33985591
PMCPMC8117660

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.