Informing Science Special Series: Informing Each Other Using the World Wide Web to Connect Research and Professional Practice: towards Evidence-based Practice

Introduction The Problem Addressed There is an enormous amount of new knowledge generated every year as a result of academic research. To make a practical difference, this knowledge needs to be disseminated and used in practice. Knowledge has no real value on its own--it only becomes valuable when people use it make decisions and take action (Sveiby, 1997). However in most disciplines, research findings take a long time to filter into practice, if they ever do at all. There are a number of barriers to the flow of knowledge between research and practice, which originate from both sides of the divide: * Practitioner's viewpoint (demand side): The pressures of professional practice leaves little time for practitioners to read journals or attend conferences: time is money, and most organisations do not reward their employees for keeping up with research in their field. Also, the volume of research published every year means that practitioners could not possibly keep up with all the latest research developments in their field--if they did, they would have little time to do anything else. * Researcher's viewpoint (supply side): Academic research is primarily focused on production rather than distribution of knowledge (Gibbons et al, 1994). Research communities have developed highly efficient mechanisms for transfer of knowledge among themselves (via the processes of publication and citation), but there is little investment in the dissemination of research results into practice. As a result, potentially valuable research ideas are circulated within research communities without ever finding their way into practice. Part of the reason for this is that academic institutions reward researchers for publishing their ideas in scholarly journals and conferences, not for having them applied in practice. The result of these barriers is under-utilisation of research results and sub-optimal practices. This is undesirable from the point of view of practitioners and researchers: * Researchers do not get their ideas tested in practice, which is a limiting factor in the development and evolution of these ideas (Wynekoop and Russo, 1997) * In the absence of relevant knowledge about effectiveness of practices, practitioners persist in using practices that are obsolete or proven not to work. As a result, professional practice has limited ability to learn from its mistakes. Manufacturing Model of Knowledge Production In manufacturing, it is important to pay equal attention to production and distribution. To get maximum value from investments in production of goods, it is necessary to have parallel investments in distribution, to ensure that goods get sold and produce revenue. Similarly, to get maximum value from investments in research, it is necessary to have parallel investments in dissemination of research results, in order to improve practices and achieve social outcomes. The issue of how to transfer research results into practice is rarely addressed by researchers, and requires much more than publication in scholarly journals and conferences, which is normally seen as the endpoint of a research project. However, very little is known about how ideas are diffused in practice. The mechanisms are not as well understood as in the academic world, and rely more on informal channels, such as word of mouth (Gibbons et al, 1994). Knowledge Management Fundamental to understanding the issues involved in transferring research findings to practice is the concept of knowledge management. Knowledge management has only recently emerged as a field of practice in its own right (Sveiby, 1997; Davenport and Prusak, 1998). Knowledge is a high value form of information that can be used to make decisions and take action (Davenport et al, 1998). A key difference between knowledge and information or data is that it is intellectually intensive rather than IT-intensive. …

[1]  R. Gibberd,et al.  An analysis of the causes of adverse events from the Quality in Australian Health Care Study , 1999, The Medical journal of Australia.

[2]  T. Caeiro,et al.  [Error in medicine]. , 2004, Medicina.

[3]  Bush Jones,et al.  Architecture of systems problem solving , 1986, Journal of the American Society for Information Science.

[4]  E. Ackermann The Quality in Australian Health Care Study. , 1996, The Medical journal of Australia.

[5]  H. D. Thomas,et al.  SUCCESSFUL KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT PROJECTS , 1998 .

[6]  L. Squire,et al.  The Neuropsychology of Memory , 1990 .

[7]  A. L. Cochrane,et al.  Effectiveness and efficiency: random reflections on health services , 1972 .

[8]  Efraim Turban,et al.  Decision Support and Expert Systems: Management Support Systems , 1990 .

[9]  Robert D. Galliers,et al.  Relevance and rigour in Information Systems Research: some personal reflections on issues facing the Information Systems research community , 1994, Business Process Re-Engineering.

[10]  J. Lopreato,et al.  General system theory : foundations, development, applications , 1970 .

[11]  G. Glass,et al.  Meta-analysis in social research , 1981 .

[12]  Judy L. Wynekoop,et al.  Studying system development methodologies: an examination of research methods , 1997, Inf. Syst. J..

[13]  Thomas H. Davenport,et al.  Rigor vs. relevance revisited: response to Benbasat and Zmud , 1999 .

[14]  M. Polanyi Chapter 7 – The Tacit Dimension , 1997 .

[15]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  Empirical Research in Information Systems: The Practice of Relevance , 1999, MIS Q..

[16]  Henk Sol,et al.  Proc. of the IFIP WG 8.1 working conference on Information systems design methodologies: improving the practice , 1986 .

[17]  L. Irwig,et al.  Use of systematic reviews of randomised trials by Australian neonatologists and obstetricians. , 1998, The Medical journal of Australia.

[18]  M R Kidd,et al.  How safe is Australian general practice and how can it be made safer? , 1998, The Medical journal of Australia.

[19]  H. Klein,et al.  Information systems research: contemporary approaches and emergent traditions , 1991 .

[20]  P. Phillips Disseminating and applying best evidence , 1998, The Medical journal of Australia.

[21]  Morten T. Hansen,et al.  What's your strategy for managing knowledge? , 1999, Harvard business review.

[22]  Bill C. Hardgrave,et al.  Forums for MIS scholars , 1997, CACM.

[23]  Mark T. Keane On drawing analogies when solving problems: A theory and test of solution generation in an analogical problem‐solving task , 1985 .

[24]  Clare Atkins,et al.  Reclaiming Knowledge: A Case for Evidence-Based Information Systems , 2000, ECIS.

[25]  M. Meehan General System Theory: Foundations, Development, Applications , 1969 .

[26]  Dedre Gentner,et al.  Structure-Mapping: A Theoretical Framework for Analogy , 1983, Cogn. Sci..

[27]  M. O'Connor,et al.  Judgemental adjustment of initial forecasts: Its effectiveness and biases , 1995 .

[28]  G. A. Miller THE PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW THE MAGICAL NUMBER SEVEN, PLUS OR MINUS TWO: SOME LIMITS ON OUR CAPACITY FOR PROCESSING INFORMATION 1 , 1956 .

[29]  C. Green,et al.  Normative Influence on the Acceptance of Information Technology , 1998 .

[30]  L. Weed New connections between medical knowledge and patient care , 1997, BMJ.

[31]  S. Schwartzman,et al.  The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies , 1994 .

[32]  L. Irwig,et al.  Use of systematic reviews of randomised trials by Australian neonatologists and obstetricians , 1998, The Medical journal of Australia.

[33]  Thomas H. Davenport,et al.  Book review:Working knowledge: How organizations manage what they know. Thomas H. Davenport and Laurence Prusak. Harvard Business School Press, 1998. $29.95US. ISBN 0‐87584‐655‐6 , 1998 .

[34]  S. Satya‐Murti Evidence-based Medicine: How to Practice and Teach EBM , 1997 .

[35]  Michael Lawrence,et al.  Prototyping a financial DSS , 1999 .

[36]  P. Goodwin Improving the voluntary integration of statistical forecasts and judgment , 2000 .

[37]  Dhm Ayers,et al.  The User Connection: Making the Clinical Information Systems Vision Work for NSW Health , 1997 .

[38]  A. Baddeley The magical number seven: still magic after all these years? , 1994, Psychological review.

[39]  G. A. Miller THE PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW THE MAGICAL NUMBER SEVEN, PLUS OR MINUS TWO: SOME LIMITS ON OUR CAPACITY FOR PROCESSING INFORMATION 1 , 1956 .

[40]  K. Holyoak,et al.  Analogical problem solving , 1980, Cognitive Psychology.

[41]  Karl-Erik Sveiby The New Organizational Wealth: Managing and Measuring Knowledge-Based Assets , 1997 .

[42]  Mark T. Keane,et al.  Cognitive Psychology: A Student's Handbook , 1990 .

[43]  Daniel L. Moody,et al.  Building links between IS research and professional practice: improving the relevance and impact of IS research , 2000, ICIS.

[44]  G. Ryle,et al.  The concept of mind. , 2004, The International journal of psycho-analysis.

[45]  Keith J. Holyoak,et al.  The Pragmatics of Analogical Transfer , 1985 .