Scoping review identifies significant number of knowledge translation theories, models, and frameworks with limited use.

OBJECTIVES To conduct a scoping review of knowledge translation (KT) theories, models, and frameworks that have been used to guide dissemination or implementation of evidence-based interventions targeted to prevention and/or management of cancer or other chronic diseases. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING We used a comprehensive multistage search process from 2000 to 2016, which included traditional bibliographic database searching, searching using names of theories, models and frameworks, and cited reference searching. Two reviewers independently screened the literature and abstracted the data. RESULTS We found 596 studies reporting on the use of 159 KT theories, models, or frameworks. A majority (87%) of the identified theories, models, or frameworks were used in five or fewer studies, with 60% used once. The theories, models, and frameworks were most commonly used to inform planning/design, implementation and evaluation activities, and least commonly used to inform dissemination and sustainability/scalability activities. Twenty-six were used across the full implementation spectrum (from planning/design to sustainability/scalability) either within or across studies. All were used for at least individual-level behavior change, whereas 48% were used for organization-level, 33% for community-level, and 17% for system-level change. CONCLUSION We found a significant number of KT theories, models, and frameworks with a limited evidence base describing their use.

[1]  J. McGowan,et al.  PRESS Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies: 2015 Guideline Statement. , 2016, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[2]  David A Chambers,et al.  Bridging research and practice: models for dissemination and implementation research. , 2012, American journal of preventive medicine.

[3]  Jeremy M Grimshaw,et al.  A systematic review of the use of theory in the design of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies and interpretation of the results of rigorous evaluations , 2010, Implementation science : IS.

[4]  Todd C. Lehmann,et al.  Assessing citation networks for dissemination and implementation research frameworks , 2017, Implementation Science.

[5]  Sharon E. Straus,et al.  A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews , 2016, BMC Medical Research Methodology.

[6]  Andrew Booth,et al.  Systematic searching for theory to inform systematic reviews: is it feasible? Is it desirable? , 2015, Health information and libraries journal.

[7]  Abraham Wandersman,et al.  The Quality Implementation Framework: A Synthesis of Critical Steps in the Implementation Process , 2012, American journal of community psychology.

[8]  Pierre Chartrand,et al.  Canadian Institutes of Health Research , 2018, The Grants Register 2022.

[9]  H. Arksey,et al.  Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework , 2005 .

[10]  Kevin W Eva,et al.  Building theories of knowledge translation interventions: Use the entire menu of constructs , 2012, Implementation Science.

[11]  D. Moher,et al.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. , 2010, International journal of surgery.

[12]  Iveta Simera,et al.  The EQUATOR Network: Enhancing the quality and transparency of health research through the use of reporting guidelines , 2008 .

[13]  A. Bandura Social Foundations of Thought and Action , 1986 .

[14]  Sarah Visintini,et al.  Knowledge Translation in Health Care: Moving from Evidence to Practice. 2nd ed. , 2014 .

[15]  S. Straus,et al.  Knowledge translation in health care : moving from evidence to practice , 2009 .

[16]  R. Glasgow,et al.  Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework. , 1999, American journal of public health.

[17]  J. Grimshaw,et al.  Changing the behavior of healthcare professionals: the use of theory in promoting the uptake of research findings. , 2005, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[18]  R. West Time for a change: putting the Transtheoretical (Stages of Change) Model to rest. , 2005, Addiction.

[19]  C. May,et al.  Implementing, Embedding, and Integrating Practices: An Outline of Normalization Process Theory , 2009 .

[20]  J. Grimshaw,et al.  A systematic review of the use of theory in randomized controlled trials of audit and feedback , 2013, Implementation Science.

[21]  C. Abraham,et al.  Making psychological theory useful for implementing evidence based practice: a consensus approach , 2005, Quality and Safety in Health Care.

[22]  Michelle Fiander,et al.  THE EFFECT OF ENGLISH-LANGUAGE RESTRICTION ON SYSTEMATIC REVIEW-BASED META-ANALYSES: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF EMPIRICAL STUDIES , 2012, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[23]  P. Nilsen Making sense of implementation theories, models and frameworks , 2015, Implementation Science.

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

[25]  Sharon E Straus,et al.  Knowledge translation is the use of knowledge in health care decision making. , 2011, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[26]  Susan Michie,et al.  Demystifying theory and its use in improvement , 2015, BMJ quality & safety.

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

[28]  J. Lowery,et al.  Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science , 2009, Implementation science : IS.

[29]  D. Moher,et al.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. , 2010, International journal of surgery.

[30]  M. Peters,et al.  Methodology for jbi scoping reviews , 2015 .