ArticleJournal of participatory medicine2026
Integrated Knowledge Translation for Social Innovations: Case Study on Knowledge Translation Innovation Incubator.
Article in Journal of participatory medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The Knowledge Translation Innovation Incubator (KTII) initiative, launched by the Knowledge Translation program of the CHILD-BRIGHT Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research Network, provided funding support for researchers and partners to experiment with various approaches and strategies to support the development of innovative knowledge translation (KT) research in the context of neurodevelopmental disabilities. Objective: We aimed to describe the process and contexts of innovation development in integrated knowledge translation (iKT) practices in patient-oriented research. Methods: We applied an iKT practice to conduct the collective case study of 7 KTII-funded projects. We interviewed 10 researchers, 4 research trainees, 2 clinicians, 2 parentpartners, 2 patient-partners (1 adult and 1 youth), 1 community partner, 1 KT specialist, 1 designer, and 1 research program manager at the middle and the end of the project period. We conducted qualitative content analysis using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to identify and assess patterns of determinants of (1) drivers of innovation, (2) facilitators and barriers to innovation development, and (3) enablers for sustainability of KT products. Results: Innovative KT was majorly driven by the identified know-do gap to meet the needs of people with lived experience. Outer setting constructs, such as funding and partnerships and connections, were not only drivers but also facilitators to innovation development. iKT practices presented in this case study were fostered by researchers' approach to participatory design, involving iterations of listening to emerging ideas and feedback of patient-partners and other partners, and researchers' continuous reflections on their roles in knowledge creation. Despite the challenges in building consensus and the limited time of the fluid process, researchers' strong passion for engagement and value placed on lived experience led to flexible engagement and open communication to create KT products. Intangible outcomes included further relationships at individual and organizational levels, capacity building of young people, and a collective voice to influence communities. Sustainment of the KT products requires not only accessibility and adaptability of the product itself but also mechanisms at inner settings, such as training, continued interest of patient-partners and the community, and institutional partnerships to support the further uptake of the product. Conclusions: This study illustrates the critical roles of researchers in addressing power dynamics and making the research partners' tacit knowledge visible for successful innovative KT. The research landscape should also change in terms of funding and timeline in order to foster researchers' mental models in designing thinking and actions on collaborative research engagement.
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.