Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35168662›Full record

ArticleImplementation science communications2022

A pragmatic evaluation of a public health knowledge broker mentoring education program: a convergent mixed methods study.

Emily C Clark, Bandna Dhaliwal, Donna Ciliska, Sarah E Neil-Sztramko, Marla Steinberg, Maureen Dobbins

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science communications, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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.

Emily C ClarkNational Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools, McMaster University, McMaster Innovation Park, 175 Longwood Rd S, Suite 210a, Hamilton, ON, L8P 0A1, Canada.
Bandna DhaliwalNational Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools, McMaster University, McMaster Innovation Park, 175 Longwood Rd S, Suite 210a, Hamilton, ON, L8P 0A1, Canada.
Donna CiliskaNational Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools, McMaster University, McMaster Innovation Park, 175 Longwood Rd S, Suite 210a, Hamilton, ON, L8P 0A1, Canada.
Sarah E Neil-SztramkoNational Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools, McMaster University, McMaster Innovation Park, 175 Longwood Rd S, Suite 210a, Hamilton, ON, L8P 0A1, Canada.
Marla Steinberg, Vancouver, Canada.
Maureen DobbinsNational Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools, McMaster University, McMaster Innovation Park, 175 Longwood Rd S, Suite 210a, Hamilton, ON, L8P 0A1, Canada. dobbinsm@mcmaster.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1968-6765

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPublic health professionals are expected to use the best available research and contextual evidence to inform decision-making. The National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools developed, implemented, and evaluated a Knowledge Broker mentoring program aimed at facilitating organization-wide evidence-informed decision-making in ten public health units in Ontario, Canada. The purpose of this study was to pragmatically assess the impact of the program.

methodsA convergent mixed methods design was used to interpret quantitative results in the context of the qualitative findings. A goal-setting exercise was conducted with senior leadership in each organization prior to implementing the program. Achievement of goals was quantified through deductive coding of post-program interviews with participants and management. Interviews analyzed inductively to qualitatively explain progress toward identified goals and identify key factors related to implementation of EIDM within the organization.

resultsOrganizations met their goals for evidence use to varying degrees. The key themes identified that support an organizational shift to EIDM include definitive plans for participants to share knowledge during and after program completion, embedding evidence into decision-making processes, and supportive leadership with organizational investment of time and resources. The location, setting, or size of health units was not associated with attainment of EIDM goals; small, rural health units were not at a disadvantage compared to larger, urban health units.

conclusionsThe Knowledge Broker mentoring program allowed participants to share their learning and support change at their health units. When paired with organizational supports such as supportive leadership and resource investment, this program holds promise as an innovative knowledge translation strategy for organization wide EIDM among public health organizations.

Indexed as

Capacity buildingEvidence-informed decision-makingKnowledge brokerKnowledge translationMixed methodsOrganizational changeProfessional developmentPublic healthResearch evidence

Identifiers

PMID35168662
PMCPMC8845284

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.