Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40033336›Full record

ArticleHealth research policy and systems2025

Attitudes and perceptions regarding knowledge translation and community engagement in medical research: the PERSPECT qualitative study.

Bogna A Drozdowska, Nora Cristall, Joachim Fladt, Tanaporn Jaroenngarmsamer, Arshia Sehgal, Rosalie McDonough, Mayank Goyal, Aravind Ganesh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health research policy and systems, 2025. 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. Review
  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

8 authors.

Bogna A DrozdowskaDepartment of Clinical Neurosciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada. bognaanna.drozdowska@ucalgary.ca.
Nora CristallDepartment of Clinical Neurosciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Joachim FladtDepartment of Radiology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Tanaporn JaroenngarmsamerFaculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Arshia SehgalDepartment of Radiology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Rosalie McDonoughDepartment of Radiology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Mayank GoyalDepartment of Clinical Neurosciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Aravind GaneshDepartment of Clinical Neurosciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe medical research community widely endorses the importance of ensuring that research outputs are relevant and accessible to knowledge users, as well as the value of engaging the latter in the conduct of research to achieve these goals. However, it appears these principles are reflected in actual medical research practices to a limited extent. To better understand this dissonance, we conducted a qualitative investigation into the perspectives of key stakeholders on bridging the knowledge-to-action gap and patient and public engagement.

methodsThe Priorities and Expectations of Researchers, Donors, Patients and the Public Regarding the Funding and Conduct of Medical Research (PERSPECT) qualitative study involved in-depth, semi-structured interviews with representatives of four stakeholder groups. Among other topics, participants were asked to discuss issues related to moving medical research knowledge into action (knowledge translation), including patient and public engagement during the research journey as a prerequisite to the success of this process. We analysed collected data employing an interpretative grounded theory approach. Data collection was ended once thematic saturation had been attained.

resultsA total of 41 interviews were completed and analysed (with 10 patients, 10 members of the general public, 11 researchers and 10 funders). Many participants expressed a belief in the importance of engaging patients in the research process, as well as ensuring that study findings reach beyond academic communities. However, multiple challenges and barriers were identified to implementing these values in practice, including: researchers having limited knowledge and tools to foster partnerships with community members; research outputs being inaccessible to the wider public; and the public having insufficient capacity - in view of the required time, effort and knowledge - to assimilate findings and contribute to ongoing research. Cumulatively, interviews indicated a continuing disconnect between research and lay communities, where each stakeholder group holds some responsibility for improving the current paradigm.

conclusionsExisting gaps in communication, knowledge and relevant competencies are fuelling a disconnect between research and lay communities. Successfully moving research knowledge into action requires joint efforts of multiple stakeholder groups with support from external resources to ensure necessary training, expertise and credible dissemination platforms.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchCommunity ParticipationHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeTranslational Research, BiomedicalAdultFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedPatient ParticipationPerceptionQualitative ResearchResearch PersonnelStakeholder ParticipationImplementationKnowledge applicationKnowledge disseminationKnowledge translationPatient and public engagement

Identifiers

PMID40033336
PMCPMC11874800

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.