↓ Skip to main content

Moving knowledge into action for more effective practice, programmes and policy: protocol for a research programme on integrated knowledge translation

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#34 of 1,632)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
106 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
94 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
306 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Moving knowledge into action for more effective practice, programmes and policy: protocol for a research programme on integrated knowledge translation
Published in
Implementation Science, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13012-017-0700-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ian D. Graham, Anita Kothari, Chris McCutcheon

Abstract

Health research is conducted with the expectation that it advances knowledge and eventually translates into improved health systems and population health. However, research findings are often caught in the know-do gap: they are not acted upon in a timely way or not applied at all. Integrated knowledge translation (IKT) is advanced as a way to increase the relevance, applicability and impact of research. With IKT, knowledge users work with researchers throughout the research process, starting with identification of the research question. Knowledge users represent those who would be able to use research results to inform their decisions (e.g. clinicians, managers, policy makers, patients/families and others). Stakeholders are increasingly interested in the idea that IKT generates greater and faster societal impact. Stakeholders are all those who are interested in the use of research results but may not necessarily use them for their own decision-making (e.g. governments, funders, researchers, health system managers and policy makers, patients and clinicians). Although IKT is broadly accepted, the actual research supporting it is limited and there is uncertainty about how best to conduct and support IKT. This paper presents a protocol for a programme of research testing the assumption that engaging the users of research in phases of its production leads to (a) greater appreciation of and capacity to use research; (b) the production of more relevant, useful and applicable research that results in greater impact; and (c) conditions under which it is more likely that research results will influence policy, managerial and clinical decision-making. The research programme will adopt an interdisciplinary, international, cross-sector approach, using multiple and mixed methods to reflect the complex and social nature of research partnerships. We will use ongoing and future natural IKT experiments as multiple cases to study IKT in depth, and we will take advantage of the team's existing relationships with provincial, national and international organizations. Case studies will be retrospective and prospective, and the 7-year grant period will enable longitudinal studies. The initiation of partnerships, funding processes, the research lifecycle and then outcomes/impacts post project will be studied in real time. These living laboratories will also allow testing of strategies to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the IKT approach. This is the first interdisciplinary, systematic and programmatic research study on IKT. The research will provide scientific evidence on how to reliably and validly measure collaborative research partnerships and their impacts. The proposed research will build the science base for IKT, assess its relationship with research use and identify best practices and appropriate conditions for conducting IKT to achieve the greatest impact. It will also train and mentor the next generation of IKT researchers.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 106 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 306 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 306 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 57 19%
Student > Master 48 16%
Researcher 46 15%
Other 19 6%
Professor 18 6%
Other 61 20%
Unknown 57 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 52 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 48 16%
Social Sciences 46 15%
Psychology 11 4%
Engineering 8 3%
Other 62 20%
Unknown 79 26%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 78. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 November 2019.
All research outputs
#364,535
of 19,178,874 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#34
of 1,632 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,330
of 385,425 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#1
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,178,874 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,632 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 385,425 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.