Supporting collaborative use of the diabetes population risk tool (DPoRT) in health-related practice: a multiple case study research protocol

BackgroundHealth policy makers have stated that diabetes prevention is a priority; however, the type, intensity, and target of interventions or policy changes that will achieve the greatest impact remains uncertain. In response to this uncertainty, the Diabetes Population Risk Tool (DPoRT) was developed and validated to estimate future diabetes risk based on routinely collected population data. To facilitate use of DPoRT, we partnered with regional and provincial health-related decision makers in Ontario and Manitoba, Canada. Primary objectives include: i) evaluate the effectiveness of partnerships between the research team and DPoRT users; ii) explore strategies that facilitate uptake and overcome barriers to DPoRT use; and iii) implement and evaluate the knowledge translation approach.MethodsThis protocol reflects an integrated knowledge translation (IKT) approach and corresponds to the action phase of the Knowledge-to-Action (KtoA) framework. Our IKT approach includes: employing a knowledge brokering team to facilitate relationships with DPoRT users (objective 1); tailored training for DPoRT users; assessment of barriers and facilitators to DPoRT use; and customized dissemination strategies to present DPoRT outputs to decision maker audiences (objective 2). Finally, a utilization-focused evaluation will assess the effectiveness and impact of the proposed KtoA process for DPoRT application (objective 3). This research design utilizes a multiple case study approach. Units of analyses consist of two public health units, one provincial health organization, and one provincial knowledge dissemination team whereby we will connect with multiple regional health authorities. Evaluation will be based on analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data collected from passive (e.g., observer notes) and active (e.g., surveys and interviews) methods.DiscussionDPoRT offers an innovative way to make routinely collected population health data practical and meaningful for diabetes prevention planning and decision making. Importantly, we will evaluate the utility of the KtoA cycle for a novel purpose – the application of a tool. Additionally, we will evaluate this approach in multiple diverse settings, thus considering contextual factors. This research will offer insights into how knowledge translation strategies can support the use of population-based risk assessment tools to promote informed decision making in health-related settings.

[1]  Mathias Beike,et al.  Evaluation Roots Tracing Theorists Views And Influences , 2016 .

[2]  H. Stein Epidemiology and health policy. , 1977, International journal of epidemiology.

[3]  A D Oxman,et al.  No magic bullets: a systematic review of 102 trials of interventions to improve professional practice. , 1995, CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne.

[4]  S. Hanna,et al.  Using knowledge brokers to facilitate the uptake of pediatric measurement tools into clinical practice: a before-after intervention study , 2010, Implementation science : IS.

[5]  J. Lavis,et al.  How can research organizations more effectively transfer research knowledge to decision makers? , 2003, The Milbank quarterly.

[6]  Sarah Bowen,et al.  Demystifying knowledge translation: learning from the community , 2005, Journal of health services research & policy.

[7]  K. Wilson,et al.  Predictive risk algorithms in a population setting: an overview , 2012, Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health.

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

[9]  M. Dobbins,et al.  Changing nursing practice: evaluating the usefulness of a best-practice guideline implementation toolkit. , 2005, Nursing leadership.

[10]  P. Kontos,et al.  Implementation Science BioMed Central Debate , 2009 .

[11]  S. Merriam Qualitative Case Studies , 2010 .

[12]  L. Peirson,et al.  Building capacity for evidence informed decision making in public health: a case study of organizational change , 2012, BMC Public Health.

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

[14]  I. Graham,et al.  Innovations in knowledge transfer and continuity of care. , 2004, The Canadian journal of nursing research = Revue canadienne de recherche en sciences infirmieres.

[15]  Ulf Malmquist,et al.  Decentralizing knowledge: managing knowledge work in a software engineering firm , 2001 .

[16]  Shawna L. Mercer,et al.  A randomized controlled trial evaluating the impact of knowledge translation and exchange strategies , 2009, Implementation science : IS.

[17]  R. Lasker,et al.  Partnership synergy: a practical framework for studying and strengthening the collaborative advantage. , 2001, The Milbank quarterly.

[18]  Sarah Bowen,et al.  A model for collaborative evaluation of university-community partnerships , 2006, Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.

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

[20]  K. Hofman,et al.  Implementation Science , 2007, Science.

[21]  J ONATH A N LOM,et al.  Using Research to Inform Healthcare Managers’ And Policy Makers’ Questions: From Summative to Interpretive Synthesis , 2005 .

[22]  J. Shaw,et al.  Global and societal implications of the diabetes epidemic , 2001, Nature.

[23]  Janet E Hux,et al.  Trends in diabetes prevalence, incidence, and mortality in Ontario, Canada 1995–2005: a population-based study , 2007, The Lancet.

[24]  B. McCormack,et al.  An exploration of the factors that influence the implementation of evidence into practice. , 2004, Journal of clinical nursing.

[25]  J. Creswell,et al.  Determining Validity in Qualitative Inquiry , 2000 .

[26]  Eugene Vayda,et al.  Opinion leaders vs audit and feedback to implement practice guidelines. Delivery after previous cesarean section. , 1991, JAMA.

[27]  Rita G O'Sullivan,et al.  Collaborative evaluation within a framework of stakeholder-oriented evaluation approaches. , 2012, Evaluation and program planning.

[28]  G. Robert,et al.  Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: systematic review and recommendations. , 2004, The Milbank quarterly.

[29]  J. Hux,et al.  The role of ethnicity in predicting diabetes risk at the population level , 2012, Ethnicity & health.

[30]  Carles Muntaner,et al.  Applied Epidemiology: Theory to Practice , 2000 .

[31]  D. Weed,et al.  Roles and responsibilities of epidemiologists. , 2002, Annals of epidemiology.

[32]  R. Phillips,et al.  In for the Long Haul: Knowledge Translation Between Academic and Nonprofit Organizations , 2010, Qualitative health research.

[33]  Vivek Goel,et al.  The impact of context on evidence utilization: a framework for expert groups developing health policy recommendations. , 2006, Social science & medicine.

[34]  Alan Shiell,et al.  Theorising Interventions as Events in Systems , 2009, American journal of community psychology.

[35]  E. Tornquist,et al.  Barriers and facilitators of research utilization. An integrative review. , 1995, The Nursing clinics of North America.

[36]  J. Lomas The in-between world of knowledge brokering , 2007, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[37]  Susan Hamer,et al.  Knowledge brokering: Exploring the process of transferring knowledge into action , 2009, BMC health services research.

[38]  C. Sin The role of intermediaries in getting evidence into policy and practice: some useful lessons from examining consultancy–client relationships , 2008 .

[39]  Roy Cameron,et al.  A description of a knowledge broker role implemented as part of a randomized controlled trial evaluating three knowledge translation strategies , 2009 .

[40]  Christina A. Christie,et al.  AN EVALUATION THEORY TREE , 2004 .

[41]  A. Gagliardi Translating knowledge to practice: optimizing the use of guidelines , 2012, Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences.

[42]  A. House,et al.  Knowledge Brokering: The missing link in the evidence to action chain? , 2009, Evidence & policy : a journal of research, debate and practice.

[43]  H. Davies,et al.  Using Evidence: How research can inform public services , 2007 .

[44]  M. Patton,et al.  Qualitative evaluation methods , 1981 .

[45]  J. Macdermid,et al.  Knowledge translation: putting the "practice" in evidence-based practice. , 2009, Hand clinics.

[46]  J. Hux,et al.  The influence of measurement error on calibration, discrimination, and overall estimation of a risk prediction model , 2012, Population Health Metrics.

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

[48]  P. Martens Straw into Gold: Lessons Learned (and Still Being Learned) at the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy. , 2011, Healthcare policy = Politiques de sante.

[49]  N. Denzin The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods , 1977 .

[50]  Laura C Rosella,et al.  A population-based risk algorithm for the development of diabetes: development and validation of the Diabetes Population Risk Tool (DPoRT) , 2010, Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health.

[51]  Martin McKee,et al.  Priority actions for the non-communicable disease crisis , 2011, The Lancet.

[52]  R. Yin Case Study Research: Design and Methods , 1984 .

[53]  Lynn Westbrook,et al.  Utilization-focused evaluation , 1998 .

[54]  Morgan Meyer The Rise of the Knowledge Broker , 2010 .

[55]  Nabil Amara,et al.  The knowledge-value chain: A conceptual framework for knowledge translation in health. , 2006, Bulletin of the World Health Organization.

[56]  Trisha Greenhalgh,et al.  Risk models and scores for type 2 diabetes: systematic review , 2011, BMJ : British Medical Journal.