| Community health managers |
Securing access to high-quality evidence: National portal for access to evidence101,96 Clarity, timeliness, and strength of the evidence96 Reports distributed through professional organizations or through a clearinghouse96 Online strategies: use of wikis, discussion forums, blogs, and social media, virtual communities of practice and conferencing technology41,42, Knowledge exchange portals101; electronic communication channels: newsletters containing summaries of current research developed and directly emailed to managers96
User-friendly Reporting format:
One-page summaries with key messages tailored to the target audience64,67,96 Clear relevance of the results and factors important for contextualizing the evidence (i.e. potential short and long term outcomes, benefits, harms or risks)64,67,96
For systematic reviews96
Title framed as a question the report Use of white space, no dense text, Limit tables to one page. The methods should be concise Easy to interpret summary of the results and of the risk of bias of individual studies (graphical display) Recipe type guidance Replacing unfamiliar terms or adding definitions to the review
|
Increased Motivation, skills and competence:
Capacity-building, training and continued education96: Multicomponent active delivery of information (as opposed to only access to online registry96,39,67 Grounding KT activities in existing theories of behavioural change113 Targeted messaging, educational visits and summaries132, Concept mapping133 Greater understanding of transferability and applicability of evidence-based recommendations from one setting to another30
|
Continued interactions with data- providers at organizational, institutional level:
Partnerships with researchers to facilitate the use of evidence96 Cross-sector and interagency learning97; collaborative decision-making with other community organizations69 Reflection on the conceptual basis of knowledge mobilization activities33 Integration of librarians and health information specialists in the organization96 Availability of (human) resources, time69 Identifying measurable objectives and ensuring that evaluation measures reflect those objectives113, ‘Participatory’ evaluations with all relevant stakeholders.113 Networking for information sharing25
|
Integration of evidence, expertise, and values and circumstances
Theory-guided effort to identify and address the contextual factors most relevant to any particular intervention31,40,41,88,97 Addressing complex environmental factors and including measures of community sustainability and institutional change in the outcomes113
a
Focus on a new target population, a new setting35,41
a
Increased coverage and equity of access to evidence-based interventions49
a
Cultural appropriateness,35,41 Applicability of the evidence-based intervention at local level41,41,66
a
Outreach to key players in the communities where the interventions would take place, including in non- clinical settings40,69,88,113
a
Collaboration between community partners,69 Networking for information sharing25
a
Conducting a community assessment prior to finalizing program's specific objectives113
a
Harnessing the role of media, and social marketing campaigns66
|
| Health policy-makers |
Securing Access to high-quality evidence:
Clarity, timeliness and strength of the evidence81,100,112 Fast and easy referencing,101 Reports distributed through professional organizations or through a clearinghouse,96 use of electronic communication channels: i.e. newsletters containing summaries of current evidence9
User-friendly Reporting format: One-page summaries with key messages tailored to the target audience64,67,96 Clear relevance of the results and factors important for contextualizing the evidence (i.e. potential short and long term outcomes, benefits, harms or risks),64,67,96 For systematic reviews96: (1) Title framed as a question the report (2) Use of white space, no dense text, (3) Limit tables to one page. (4) The methods should be concise (5) Easy to interpret summary of the results and of the risk of bias of individual studies (graphical display) (6) Recipe type guidance (7) Replacing unfamiliar terms or adding definitions to the review
a
Framing the evidence in terms of ‘how’/ solution-oriented recommendations64,67,96
Providing tools to aid evidence-use16,17,80,94,95: Packaging tools include synthesis methods, such as policy briefs, and visualization methods; Application tools include surveillance data and modelling/simulation to explore the behaviour and performance of processes and interventions; Dissemination and communication tools include health information-sharing platforms, newsletters and person-to-person communications; Linkage and exchange tools such as knowledge networks facilitate the dissemination of health information and the likelihood of translating research to policy9,17,100
|
Increased Motivation, skills and competence:
Capacity-building, training and continued education81,100 Multicomponent active delivery of information (as opposed to only access to online registry)39,67,96 Targeting multiple organizational capabilities, including staff skills and competence in using evidence108 Grounding KT activities in existing theories of behavioural change, and based on an understanding of how policy agencies use evidence and how they view their roles108 A common understanding between data-providers and data-users,81 a sense of trust, and a shared vision among stakeholders75 Greater understanding of transferability and applicability of evidence-based recommendations from one setting to another30 Tailored interactive workshops and goal-focused mentoring100
|
Continued interactions with data-providers at organizational, institutional level:
a
Stable, clear and decentralized decision-making authority has greater capacity to adopt innovations102 Support for the use and evaluation of research use in policy development25,96 allocation of resources96 Reflection on the conceptual basis of approaches and increased evaluation of knowledge mobilization activities33 Partnerships between researchers and policy-makers/ managers to facilitate the conduct and use of evidence9,81,96; Co-creation of knowledge with researchers81,96
a
Advisory role by policy-makers on research teams (i.e. involved with the development of research questions, assisted with dissemination)9
a
Leaders commissioning evidence9,100,103; research targeted at the needs of decision-makers100 Networking for information sharing25 Institutionalized knowledge brokers33 Integration of librarians and health information specialists in the organization96
|
Integration of evidence, expertise, and values and circumstances
Recognition of multi-level processes (professional, organizational, local system) and interactions across these level75 The primacy of local evidence, and the important role of local experts41,88
a
Harnessing political processes at all levels to shape the selection and use of evidence in decision-making41,88 Networking for information sharing25 Taking account of the determinants related to the social-political context in which the evidence is used31,97
a
Support to enable cross-sector and interagency learning33; Platforms for cross-sector collaborations112
|
| Clinicians and allied health professionals |
Securing Access to high-quality evidence:
Evidence strength and quality56
a
Rapid access to suitably filtered evidence109 Annual reports from quality registers should be more detailed and give more consideration to random variation41,99 Providing tools to aid evidence-use16,17,80,94,95 Packaging tools include synthesis and visualization methods94 Application tools include surveillance data and modelling/simulation to explore the behaviour and performance of processes and interventions16,9,41,94
a
Clinical decision support systems41,80,109 Dissemination and communication tools include health information-sharing platforms, newsletters and person-to-person communications16,41,94
|
Increased motivation, skills and competence:
a
Health professionals' perceived usability and practice behaviour change vary by type of information and communication technology41,75 Increasing personal readiness for change70 Building and maintaining trust88 Research capacity building and training programmes43,61; Training in the use of specific technologies supporting access to (i.e. electronic health records), and use of evidence41,41,68,80,94,109 Bringing out the added-value of websites and search engines41,80
a
Trained staff in the teaching and practice of EBM72 (Evidence-Based Medicine); understanding of effective KT strategies37 Participatory action frameworks based on interactive knowledge exchange (e.g. blended learning) rather than passive unidirectional approaches alone (e.g. lectures)41,73 Involving opinion leaders (person typically nominated by colleagues as ‘educationally influential’)85
|
a
Improving organizational climate and culture41,56,68:
Agreement of objectives and goals, collaborative decision-making, greater levels of social cohesion41,88 Facilitation to prepare clinicians and organizations for implementation70,76 Multimodal delivery of KT interventions at the organizational level39,67,79,109
a
Building communities of practice and advanced care planning: i.e. Engaging frontline staff and health managers in data collection and evidence, use41,80, aAvailability of peers staff and technical resources,106 social networks110 Involvement of librarians and health information specialists96
Leadership and managerial support in the use of evidence41,56: Fidelity monitoring and supervision of KT efforts41,68 Requiring particular forms of evidence to inform decision-making41,75 Financial incentives and resources38 Measuring/improving organizational readiness for change70,95,102
a
Performance rankings14 Active follow-up of KT interventions95
|
Integration of evidence, expertise, and values and circumstances58:
Facilitating the implementation of empirically valid interventions in health care58 i.e. Policy measures aimed at supporting screening delivery, as well as organizational changes, influencing the operational features of preventive services41,49 Resources allocated to ensure that participation in evidence-based programmes is not limited by financial barriers106 Recognition of multi-level processes (professional, organizational, local system) and interactions across these level41,75
a
Pan-regional organizations shape innovation decision-making at lower levels58 (i.e. Reference Networks, Professional societies and practice guideline development)
|
