Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36395114›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Recognition of knowledge translation practice in Canadian health sciences tenure and promotion: A content analysis of institutional policy documents.

Kathryn M Sibley, Masood Khan, Davina Banner, S Michelle Driedger, Heather L Gainforth, Ian D Graham, Katrina Plamondon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. 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. Primate conservation: A public issue?American journal of primatology · 2025
    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

7 authors.

Kathryn M SibleyDepartment of Community Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-6212-5437
Masood KhanDepartment of Community Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.
Davina BannerSchool of Nursing, University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, BC, Canada.
S Michelle DriedgerDepartment of Community Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.
Heather L GainforthSchool of Health and Exercise Sciences, University of British Columbia, Kelowna, BC, Canada.
Ian D GrahamSchool of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-3669-1216
Katrina PlamondonSchool of Nursing, University of British Columbia, Kelowna, BC, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectiveThere has been growing emphasis on increasing impacts of academic health research by integrating research findings in healthcare. The concept of knowledge translation (KT) has been widely adopted in Canada to guide this work, although lack of recognition in tenure and promotion (T&P) structures have been identified as barrier to researchers undertaking KT. Our objective was to explore how KT is considered in institutional T&P documentation in Canadian academic health sciences.

methodsWe conducted content analysis of T&P documents acquired from 19 purposively sampled research-intensive or largest regional Canadian institutions in 2020-2021. We coded text for four components of KT (synthesis, dissemination, exchange, application). We identified clusters of related groups of documents interpreted together within the same institution. We summarized manifest KT content with descriptive statistics and identified latent categories related to how KT is considered in T&P documentation.

resultsWe acquired 89 unique documents from 17 institutions that formed 48 document clusters. Most of the 1057 text segments were categorized as dissemination (n = 851, 81%), which was included in 47 document clusters (98%). 15 document clusters (31%) included all four KT categories, while one (2%) did not have any KT categories identified. We identified two latent categories: primarily implicit recognition of KT; and an overall lack of clarity on KT.

conclusionsOur analysis of T&P documents from primarily research-intensive Canadian universities showed a lack of formal recognition for a comprehensive approach to KT and emphasis on traditional dissemination. We recommend that institutions explicitly and comprehensively consider KT in T&P and align documentation and procedures to reflect these values.

Indexed as

MedicineTranslational Science, BiomedicalCanadaHumansOrganizational PolicyResearch Personnel

Identifiers

PMID36395114
PMCPMC9671374

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.