Knowledge translation strategies designed for public health decision-making settings: a scoping review

To review and describe available Knowledge Translation (KT) strategies that are designed for or applied in public health decision-making settings. KT is the exchange, synthesis, and ethically sound application of knowledge. This review proposes that KT strategies in public health settings should be understood as action plans that promote evidence use and facilitate evidence-informed decision-making. This scoping review included studies that reported on KT strategies applied in public health settings, published between 2010 and 2017. Studies were searched using Medline, online KT database, and citation tracing. Data from 305 included studies were synthesized using a coding form and conceptually mapped to identify KT strategies used in public health settings. A total of 124 unique examples of KT methods or tools were identified and summarized into 38 recommended and promising KT strategies. Built on the lists of recommended strategies, this review synthesized a framework that matched all 38 KT strategies to 10 key components of the evidence-informed decision-making process. The public health KT strategies summarized and organized by this review promote a better understanding and more effective use of KT strategies.

[1]  Earl R. Babbie,et al.  The practice of social research , 1969 .

[2]  H. Thomas,et al.  An Introduction to Evidence-Informed Public Health and A Compendium of Critical Appraisal Tools for Public Health Practice , 2008 .

[3]  Andrea C Tricco,et al.  Scoping review identifies significant number of knowledge translation theories, models, and frameworks with limited use. , 2018, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[4]  D. Nutbeam,et al.  Health promotion glossary (1998) , 1998 .

[5]  Caroline Free,et al.  Scoping review methodology , 2015 .

[6]  Javad Behboodian,et al.  Bmc Medical Research Methodology Open Access Sequential Boundaries Approach in Clinical Trials with Unequal Allocation Ratios , 2022 .

[7]  J. Grimshaw,et al.  From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients' care , 2003, The Lancet.

[8]  C. Abraham,et al.  Sexual health promotion for young people delivered via digital media: a scoping review , 2015 .

[9]  J. McGowan,et al.  PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation , 2018, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[10]  D. Ciliska,et al.  The effectiveness of knowledge translation strategies used in public health: a systematic review , 2012, BMC Public Health.

[11]  Nora Jacobson,et al.  Development of a framework for knowledge translation: understanding user context , 2003, Journal of health services research & policy.

[12]  Cynthia Lokker,et al.  WhatisKT wiki: a case study of a platform for knowledge translation terms and definitions — descriptive analysis , 2013, Implementation Science.

[13]  R Brian Haynes,et al.  A cross-sectional study of the number and frequency of terms used to refer to knowledge translation in a body of health literature in 2006: a Tower of Babel? , 2010, Implementation science : IS.

[14]  Ben J Smith,et al.  WHO Health Promotion Glossary: new terms. , 2006, Health promotion international.

[15]  B. Spring,et al.  Tools for Implementing an Evidence-Based Approach in Public Health Practice , 2012, Preventing chronic disease.

[16]  M. Dixon-Woods,et al.  Conducting a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups , 2006 .

[17]  Elizabeth Waters,et al.  A glossary for evidence based public health , 2004, Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.

[18]  S. Straus,et al.  Learning in practice The case for knowledge translation : shortening the journey from evidence to effect , 2003 .

[19]  P. Ward,et al.  Knowledge translation for public health in low- and middle- income countries: a critical interpretive synthesis , 2018, Global Health Research and Policy.

[20]  Andrew Booth,et al.  Using the Knowledge to Action Framework in practice: a citation analysis and systematic review , 2014, Implementation Science.

[21]  C. Chew‐Graham,et al.  PICO, PICOS and SPIDER: a comparison study of specificity and sensitivity in three search tools for qualitative systematic reviews , 2014, BMC Health Services Research.

[22]  Nahid Golafshani,et al.  Understanding Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research , 2003 .

[23]  R. Armstrong,et al.  Knowledge translation strategies for facilitating evidence‐informed public health decision making among managers and policy‐makers , 2011 .

[24]  R. Glasgow,et al.  Why don't we see more translation of health promotion research to practice? Rethinking the efficacy-to-effectiveness transition. , 2003, American journal of public health.

[25]  A. Zwi,et al.  Pathways to “Evidence-Informed” Policy and Practice: A Framework for Action , 2005, PLoS medicine.

[26]  R Jones,et al.  Twenty years of implementation research. , 2000, Family practice.

[27]  S. Straus,et al.  Lost in knowledge translation: Time for a map? , 2006, The Journal of continuing education in the health professions.

[28]  Michael G. Wilson,et al.  Towards a common terminology: a simplified framework of interventions to promote and integrate evidence into health practices, systems, and policies , 2014, Implementation Science.

[29]  Zachary Munn,et al.  Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach , 2018, BMC Medical Research Methodology.