Title |
Identifying priorities in knowledge translation from the perspective of trainees: results from an online survey
|
---|---|
Published in |
Implementation Science, June 2015
|
DOI | 10.1186/s13012-015-0282-5 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Kristine Newman, Dwayne Van Eerd, Byron J. Powell, Robin Urquhart, Evelyn Cornelissen, Vivian Chan, Shalini Lal |
Abstract |
The need to identify priorities to help shape future directions for research and practice increases as the knowledge translation (KT) field advances. Since many KT trainees are developing their research programs, understanding their concerns and KT research and practice priorities is important to supporting the development and advancement of KT as a field. Our purpose was to identify research and practice priorities in the KT field from the perspectives of KT researcher/practitioner trainees. Survey response rate was 62 % (44/71). Participants were mostly Canadian graduate students, post-doctoral fellows, residents, and learners from various disciplines; the majority was from Ontario (44 %) and Quebec (20 %). Seven percent (5/71) were from other countries including USA, UK, and Switzerland. Seven main KT priority themes were identified: determining the effectiveness of KT strategies, technology use, increased key stakeholder involvement, context, theory, expand ways of inquiry, and sustainability. Overall, the priorities identified by the trainees correspond with KT literature and with KT experts' views. The trainees appeared to push the boundaries of current KT literature with respect to creative use of communication technologies research. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Canada | 9 | 39% |
Lebanon | 2 | 9% |
Australia | 2 | 9% |
Argentina | 1 | 4% |
United Kingdom | 1 | 4% |
United States | 1 | 4% |
India | 1 | 4% |
Unknown | 6 | 26% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 12 | 52% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 6 | 26% |
Scientists | 3 | 13% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Canada | 1 | 1% |
Brazil | 1 | 1% |
Unknown | 75 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Researcher | 13 | 17% |
Other | 8 | 10% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 10% |
Librarian | 6 | 8% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 6% |
Other | 20 | 26% |
Unknown | 17 | 22% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 23% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 12% |
Social Sciences | 8 | 10% |
Psychology | 6 | 8% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 4% |
Other | 11 | 14% |
Unknown | 22 | 29% |