A mixed methods examination of knowledge brokers and their use of theoretical frameworks and evaluative practices
Abstract Background Knowledge brokering is a knowledge translation approach that includes making connections between researchers and decision-makers to facilitate the latter’s use of evidence in health promotion and the provision of healthcare. Despite knowledge brokering being well-established in C...
Main Authors: | , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
BMC
2020-03-01
|
Series: | Health Research Policy and Systems |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12961-020-0545-8 |
id |
doaj-17facbc342d64f32bd7b581395c0ff06 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-17facbc342d64f32bd7b581395c0ff062020-11-25T02:40:45ZengBMCHealth Research Policy and Systems1478-45052020-03-0118111110.1186/s12961-020-0545-8A mixed methods examination of knowledge brokers and their use of theoretical frameworks and evaluative practicesKristine Newman0Ryan DeForge1Dwayne Van Eerd2Yan Wei Mok3Evelyn Cornelissen4Daphne Cockwell School of Nursing, Ryerson UniversityWorld Health Innovation Network, Odette School of Business, University of WindsorInstitute for Work & HealthDaphne Cockwell School of Nursing, Ryerson UniversityDepartment of Family Practice, Faculty of Medicine, University of British ColumbiaAbstract Background Knowledge brokering is a knowledge translation approach that includes making connections between researchers and decision-makers to facilitate the latter’s use of evidence in health promotion and the provision of healthcare. Despite knowledge brokering being well-established in Canada, many knowledge gaps exist, including understanding what theoretical frameworks have been developed and which evaluative practices knowledge brokers (KBs) use. Methods This study used a mixed methods design to examine how KBs in Canada (1) use frameworks, models and theories in their practice and (2) how they evaluate knowledge brokering interventions. We gathered interview and survey data from KB practitioners to better understand their perspectives on effective practices. Our analysis focused on understanding the theoretical frameworks used by KBs. Results This study demonstrates that KBs in Canada tend not to rely on theories or models that are specific to knowledge brokering. Rather, study participants/respondents draw on (sometimes multiple) theories and models that are fundamental to the broader field of knowledge translation – in particular, the Knowledge to Action model and the Promoting Action Research in Health Sciences framework. In evaluating the impact of their own knowledge brokering practice, participants/respondents use a wide variety of mechanisms. Evaluation was often seen as less important than supporting knowledge users and/or paying clients in accessing and utilising evidence. Conclusions Knowledge brokering as a form of knowledge translation continues to expand, but the impact on its targeted knowledge users has yet to be clearly established. The quality of engagement between KBs and their clients might increase – the knowledge brokering can be more impactful – if KBs made efforts to describe, understand and evaluate their activities using theories or models specific to KB.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12961-020-0545-8HealthcareImplementation and disseminationKnowledge brokerKnowledge translationMixed methods |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Kristine Newman Ryan DeForge Dwayne Van Eerd Yan Wei Mok Evelyn Cornelissen |
spellingShingle |
Kristine Newman Ryan DeForge Dwayne Van Eerd Yan Wei Mok Evelyn Cornelissen A mixed methods examination of knowledge brokers and their use of theoretical frameworks and evaluative practices Health Research Policy and Systems Healthcare Implementation and dissemination Knowledge broker Knowledge translation Mixed methods |
author_facet |
Kristine Newman Ryan DeForge Dwayne Van Eerd Yan Wei Mok Evelyn Cornelissen |
author_sort |
Kristine Newman |
title |
A mixed methods examination of knowledge brokers and their use of theoretical frameworks and evaluative practices |
title_short |
A mixed methods examination of knowledge brokers and their use of theoretical frameworks and evaluative practices |
title_full |
A mixed methods examination of knowledge brokers and their use of theoretical frameworks and evaluative practices |
title_fullStr |
A mixed methods examination of knowledge brokers and their use of theoretical frameworks and evaluative practices |
title_full_unstemmed |
A mixed methods examination of knowledge brokers and their use of theoretical frameworks and evaluative practices |
title_sort |
mixed methods examination of knowledge brokers and their use of theoretical frameworks and evaluative practices |
publisher |
BMC |
series |
Health Research Policy and Systems |
issn |
1478-4505 |
publishDate |
2020-03-01 |
description |
Abstract Background Knowledge brokering is a knowledge translation approach that includes making connections between researchers and decision-makers to facilitate the latter’s use of evidence in health promotion and the provision of healthcare. Despite knowledge brokering being well-established in Canada, many knowledge gaps exist, including understanding what theoretical frameworks have been developed and which evaluative practices knowledge brokers (KBs) use. Methods This study used a mixed methods design to examine how KBs in Canada (1) use frameworks, models and theories in their practice and (2) how they evaluate knowledge brokering interventions. We gathered interview and survey data from KB practitioners to better understand their perspectives on effective practices. Our analysis focused on understanding the theoretical frameworks used by KBs. Results This study demonstrates that KBs in Canada tend not to rely on theories or models that are specific to knowledge brokering. Rather, study participants/respondents draw on (sometimes multiple) theories and models that are fundamental to the broader field of knowledge translation – in particular, the Knowledge to Action model and the Promoting Action Research in Health Sciences framework. In evaluating the impact of their own knowledge brokering practice, participants/respondents use a wide variety of mechanisms. Evaluation was often seen as less important than supporting knowledge users and/or paying clients in accessing and utilising evidence. Conclusions Knowledge brokering as a form of knowledge translation continues to expand, but the impact on its targeted knowledge users has yet to be clearly established. The quality of engagement between KBs and their clients might increase – the knowledge brokering can be more impactful – if KBs made efforts to describe, understand and evaluate their activities using theories or models specific to KB. |
topic |
Healthcare Implementation and dissemination Knowledge broker Knowledge translation Mixed methods |
url |
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12961-020-0545-8 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT kristinenewman amixedmethodsexaminationofknowledgebrokersandtheiruseoftheoreticalframeworksandevaluativepractices AT ryandeforge amixedmethodsexaminationofknowledgebrokersandtheiruseoftheoreticalframeworksandevaluativepractices AT dwaynevaneerd amixedmethodsexaminationofknowledgebrokersandtheiruseoftheoreticalframeworksandevaluativepractices AT yanweimok amixedmethodsexaminationofknowledgebrokersandtheiruseoftheoreticalframeworksandevaluativepractices AT evelyncornelissen amixedmethodsexaminationofknowledgebrokersandtheiruseoftheoreticalframeworksandevaluativepractices AT kristinenewman mixedmethodsexaminationofknowledgebrokersandtheiruseoftheoreticalframeworksandevaluativepractices AT ryandeforge mixedmethodsexaminationofknowledgebrokersandtheiruseoftheoreticalframeworksandevaluativepractices AT dwaynevaneerd mixedmethodsexaminationofknowledgebrokersandtheiruseoftheoreticalframeworksandevaluativepractices AT yanweimok mixedmethodsexaminationofknowledgebrokersandtheiruseoftheoreticalframeworksandevaluativepractices AT evelyncornelissen mixedmethodsexaminationofknowledgebrokersandtheiruseoftheoreticalframeworksandevaluativepractices |
_version_ |
1724779940342136832 |