Structural approaches to knowledge exchange: comparing practices across five centres of excellence in public health

被引:7
作者
Van der Graaf, P. [1 ]
Francis, O. [2 ]
Doe, E. [3 ]
Barrett, E. [4 ]
O'Rorke, M. [4 ]
Docherty, G. [5 ]
机构
[1] Teesside Univ, Ctr Translat Res Publ Hlth, Fuse, Middlesbrough TS1 3BA, Cleveland, England
[2] Univ Cambridge, Ctr Diet & Act Res, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, England
[3] Cardiff Univ, Dev & Evaluat Complex Intervent Publ Hlth Improve, Cardiff CF10 3BD, S Glam, Wales
[4] Queens Univ, Ctr Excellence Publ Hlth Northern Ireland, Belfast BT7 1NN, Antrim, North Ireland
[5] Univ Nottingham, UK Ctr Tobacco & Alcohol Studies, Nottingham NG5 1PB, England
基金
英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
decision making; public health; research personnel; translational medical research; PROFESSIONALS; CARE;
D O I
10.1093/pubmed/fdx150
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Background In 2008, five UKCRC Public Health Research Centres of Excellence were created to develop a coordinated approach to policy and practice engagement and knowledge exchange. The five Centres have developed their own models and practices for achieving these aims, which have not been compared in detail to date. Methods We applied an extended version of Saner's model for the interface between science and policy to compare five case studies of knowledge exchanges, one from each centre. We compared these practices on three dimensions within our model (focus, function and type/scale) to identify barriers and facilitators for knowledge exchange. Results The case studies shared commonalities in their range of activities (type) but illustrated different ways of linking these activities (function). The Centres' approaches ranged from structural to more organic, and varied in the extent that they engaged internal audiences (focus). Each centre addressed policymakers at different geographical levels and scale. Conclusions This article emphasizes the importance of linking a range of activities that engage policymakers at different levels, intensities and points in their decision-making processes to build relationships. Developing a structural approach to knowledge exchange activities in different contexts presents challenges of resource, implementation and evaluation.
引用
收藏
页码:I31 / I38
页数:8
相关论文
共 16 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2007, STAFF PAPERS
[2]  
CEDAR, 2013, PROM ACT TRAV CAN HE
[3]  
CEDAR, 2017, PROP CYCL TOOL ENGL
[4]  
CEDAR, 2017, EV SUBM
[5]  
CEDAR, 2015, COMM HLTH RES POL FO
[6]   Institutionalising knowledge brokering as a sustainable knowledge translation solution in healthcare: how can it work in practice? [J].
Chew, Sarah ;
Armstrong, Natalie ;
Martin, Graham .
EVIDENCE & POLICY, 2013, 9 (03) :335-351
[7]   Knowledge Exchange Processes in Organizations and Policy Arenas: A Narrative Systematic Review of the Literature [J].
Contandriopoulos, Damien ;
Lemire, Marc ;
Denis, Jean-Louis ;
Tremblay, Emile .
MILBANK QUARTERLY, 2010, 88 (04) :444-483
[8]   Consultation, for a change? Engaging users and communities in the policy process [J].
Cook, D .
SOCIAL POLICY & ADMINISTRATION, 2002, 36 (05) :516-531
[9]   Negotiating multisectoral evidence: a qualitative study of knowledge exchange at the intersection of transport and public health [J].
Guell, Cornelia ;
Mackett, Roger ;
Ogilvie, David .
BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, 2017, 17
[10]  
Jayes L, 2015, 2 HAND SMOKE 4 ENGLI