Abstract
Objective
Knowledge diffusion and utilization (KDU) have become a key focus in the health research community because of the limited success to date of research findings to inform health policies, programs and services. Yet, evidence indicates that successful KDU is often predicated on the early involvement of potential knowledge users in the conceptualization and conduct of the research and on the development of a “partnership culture”. This study describes the integration of KDU theory with practice via a case study analysis of the Consortium for Applied Research and Evaluation in Mental Health (CAREMH).
Methods
This qualitative study, using a single-case design, included a number of data sources: proposals, meeting minutes, presentations, publications, reports and curricula vitae of CAREMH members.
Results
CAREMH has adopted the following operational strategies to increase KDU capacity: 1) viewing research as a means and not as an end; 2) bringing the university and researcher to the community; 3) using participatory research methods; 4) embracing trans-disciplinary research and interactions; and 5) using connectors. Examples of the iterative process between researchers and potential knowledge users in their contribution to knowledge generation, diffusion and utilization are provided.
Conclusions
This case study supports the importance of early and ongoing involvement of relevant potential knowledge users in research to enhance its utilization potential. It also highlights the need for re-thinking research funding approaches.
Résumé
Objectif
La diffusion et l’utilisation des connaissances sont devenues des orientations clés pour les chercheurs médicaux, car jusqu’à maintenant, les politiques, programmes et services de santé ne s’inspirent pas beaucoup des résultats de recherche. Certains indices portent cependant à croire qu’une diffusion et une utilisation efficaces des connaissances dépendent souvent de la participation précoce des utilisateurs éventuels des connaissances à la conceptualisation et à la conduite de la recherche, ainsi que de l’avènement d’une „ culture de partenariat ”. Notre étude décrit l’intégration, dans la pratique, de la théorie de la diffusion et de l’utilisation des connaissances, par le biais de l’analyse d’une étude de cas du CAREMH (un consortium pour la recherche appliquée et l’évaluation en santé mentale).
Méthode
Étude qualitative fondée sur un cas et faisant appel à plusieurs sources (les propositions, procès-verbaux, présentations, publications, rapports et curriculum vitæ des membres du CAREMH).
Résultats
Le CAREMH a adopté les stratégies opérationnelles suivantes pour accroître sa capacité de diffusion et d’utilisation des connaissances: 1) considérer la recherche comme un moyen plutôt qu’une fin; 2) amener l’université et le chercheur dans la collectivité; 3) utiliser des méthodes de recherche participatives; 4) profiter de la recherche et des interactions transdisciplinaires; et 5) utiliser des „ connecteurs ”. L’étude donne des exemples du processus itératif entre les chercheurs et les utilisateurs éventuels des connaissances pour que ces derniers contribuent à la création, à la diffusion et à l’utilisation de savoirs.
Conclusions
L’étude de cas confirme l’importance, pour la recherche, de la participation précoce et continue des utilisateurs éventuels des connaissances, ceci pour améliorer l’utilisation des résultats. Elle souligne également le besoin de repenser les méthodes de financement de la recherche.
Footnotes
Funded by the Donner Canadian Foundation
CAREMH does not take specific policy positions. Accordingly, all views, positions and conclusions expressed in this article should be understood to be solely those of the authors.
References
- 1.Canadian Health Services Research Foundation. The Story So Far: Results of an International Review of the Foundation’s Work. Ottawa: CHSRF; 2002. [Google Scholar]
- 2.Centre for Health EconomicsPolicy Analysis. Knowledge Transfer II: Evaluation and Implementation. Hamilton: Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis; 2001. [Google Scholar]
- 3.Fooks C. Knowledge Transfer in Practice. 2002. [Google Scholar]
- 4.Helms WD. Bridging the gap between health services research and health policy: From analysis to action. Presentation by the Academy for Health Services Research and Health Policy. 2001. [Google Scholar]
- 5.Henke R. Final Report from the International Conference on Social Science and Governance by the Netherlands National Commission for UNESCO. Accessed at https://doi.org/www.unesco.org/most/scspconf.htm.
- 6.Institute for WorkHealth. In Focus. Putting Research to Work. Toronto: Institute for Work and Health; 2001. [Google Scholar]
- 7.Lewis S. A case of “do what we say, not as we do”? In: Basky G, editor. A Closer Look. Saskatoon: The Health Services Utilization and Research Commission; 1999. pp. 1–2. [Google Scholar]
- 8.Rubin GL, Frommer MS, Vincent N, Phillips PA. Disseminating and Implementing the Evidence. 1998. [Google Scholar]
- 9.Voluntary Sector Initiative. Knowledge Transfer. 2001. [Google Scholar]
- 10.Landry R, Amara N, Lamari M. Utilization of social science research knowledge in Canada. Res Policy. 2001;30:333–49. doi: 10.1016/S0048-7333(00)00081-0. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Lomas J. Using ‘Linkage and Exchange’ to move research into policy at Canadian Foundations. Health Aff. 2000;19:236–40. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.19.3.236. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Weiss CH. Linking evaluation to policy research. In: Shadish WR, Cook TD, Leviton LC, editors. Foundations of Program Evaluation: Theories of Practice. London: Sage; 1991. pp. 179–224. [Google Scholar]
- 13.Havelock R, Guskin A, Frohman M, Havelock M, Hill M, Huber J. Planning for Innovation Knowledge. Michigan: Centre for Research on Utilization of Scientific Knowledge; 1971. [Google Scholar]
- 14.Rogers E. Diffusion of Innovations. New York: Free Press; 1983. [Google Scholar]
- 15.Punch KF. Introduction to Social Research. California: Sage Publications; 1998. [Google Scholar]
- 16.Stake RE. Case studies. In: Denzin N, Lincoln YS, editors. Handbook of Qualitative Research. London: Sage Publications; 1994. [Google Scholar]
- 17.The Qualitative Report. 1997.
- 18.Guba EG, Lincoln YS. Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In: Denzin N, Lincoln YS, editors. Handbook of Qualitative Research. London: Sage Publications; 1994. pp. 105–17. [Google Scholar]
- 19.Vingilis E, Lindsay S. An Evaluation of the Lawson Foundation Granting Approach and Toward the Development of a “Know-How” Knowledge Diffusion and Utilization Model for Social and Health Programs. 2001. [Google Scholar]
- 20.Vingilis E, Coultes B. Mass communications and drinking-driving theories, practices and results. Alcohol, Drugs and Driving. 1990;6:61–81. [Google Scholar]
- 21.Vingilis E. Drinking Driving Research Unit. J Traffic Medicine. 1992;20:37–43. [Google Scholar]
- 22.Vingilis E, Sarkella J. Determinants and indicators of health and well-being: Tools for evaluating society on the sustainability of well-being. Soc Indicators Res. 1997;6:1–20. [Google Scholar]
- 23.Johnson JL, Green LW, Frankish J, MacLean DR, Stachenko S. A dissemination research agenda to strengthen health promotion and disease prevention. Can J Public Health. 1996;87:S5–S10. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Crosswaite C, Curtice L. Disseminating research results: The challenge of bridging the gap between health research and health action. Health Prom Int. 1994;9:289–96. doi: 10.1093/heapro/9.4.289. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Green LW, Johnson JL. Dissemination and utilization of health promotion and disease prevention knowledge: Theory, research and experience. Can J Public Health. 1996;87:S11–S17. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Maibach E, Holtgrave DR. Advances in public health communication. Annu Rev Public Health. 1995;16:219–38. doi: 10.1146/annurev.pu.16.050195.001251. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Schrecker T. ‘Making the Invisible, Visible’ in Research on Psychiatric De-institutionalization. 2000. [Google Scholar]
- 28.Schrecker T. Psychiatric De-institutionalization: Identifying the Barriers to Improving Outcomes. Colloquium Proceedings of the Consortium for Applied Research and Evaluation in Mental Health. 2001. [Google Scholar]
- 29.Ministry of HealthLong-Term Care. Mental Health Implementation Task Forces. 2002. [Google Scholar]
- 30.Blomqvist, Bishop J, Brownstone D, Cline B, Forchuk C, Hartford K, et al. The Globe and Mail. 2001. Stop punishing the sick. [Google Scholar]
- 31.Schrecker T. The Toronto Daily Star. 2002. Fighting the demons, on $930 a month. [Google Scholar]
- 32.Brown J, Lent B, Stirling A, Takhar J, Bishop J. Caring for seriously mentally ill patients: Qualitative study of family physicians’ experience. Can Fam Phys. 2002;48:915–20. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Lent B, Brown K. Case report of a seriously mentally ill patient with major medical problems: The role of the family physician. Can Fam Phys. 1999;45:1743–44. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Forchuk C. Properly planned de-institutionaliza-tion for mental illness maintained most in community living with enhanced quality of life. Evidence Based Nurs. 2001;4:39–40. doi: 10.1136/ebn.4.2.63. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 35.O’Reilly R, Bishop J. Assessment of the New York City involuntary outpatient treatment program. Psychiatric Services. 2001;52:1533. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.52.11.1533. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Schrecker T, Acosta L, Somerville MA, Bursztajn H. The ethics of social risk reduction in the era of the biological brain. Soc Sci Med. 2001;52:1677–87. doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(00)00281-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Swaminath R, Mendonca J, Vidal C, Chapman P. Experiments in change: The preliminary experiences in diversion of two Ontario communities. Can J Psychiatry. 2002;47:450–58. doi: 10.1177/070674370204700506. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Bernardo A, Forchuk C. Factors associated with readmission to a psychiatric facility. Psychiatric Services. 2001;52:1100–102. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.52.8.1100. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Bishop J, O’Reilly RL, Maddox K, Hutchinson LJ. Client satisfaction in a feasibility study comparing face-to-face interviews with telepsychiatry. J Telemedicine Telecare. 2002;8(4):217–21. doi: 10.1258/135763302320272185. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Upfold J. The triage and initial assessment of mental health patients in the emergency room. Emerg Psychiatry. 2001;7:14–17. [Google Scholar]
- 41.VanderPlaat M, Samson Y, Raven P. The politics and practice of empowerment evaluation and social interventions: Lessons from the Atlantic Community Action Program for Children regional evaluation. Can J Program Eval. 2001;16(1):83. [Google Scholar]
- 42.Lapointe T, Pennington M, Vingilis E, Stitt L. Does homelessness correlate with mental illness? 2002. [Google Scholar]
- 43.Rogers E. The Diffusion of Innovations. New York: Free Press; 1995. [Google Scholar]
- 44.Central West Planning Information Network. A Framework for Evaluating the Utilization of Health Information Products. 2000. [Google Scholar]
- 45.Cline B, Mitchell B, Petrenko M. Creating Partnerships: The London Mental Health Alliance. 2001. [Google Scholar]
- 46.Neef NA. Research on training trainers in program implementation: An introduction and future directions. J Appl Behav Anal. 1995;28:297–99. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1995.28-297. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]