Beyond the Academic Journal: Unfreezing Misconceptions About Mental Illness and Gun Violence Through Knowledge Translation to Decision-Makers

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 356-365 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua Horwitz ◽  
Anna Grilley ◽  
Orla Kennedy
Author(s):  
Maria Benkhalti ◽  
Manuel Espinoza ◽  
Richard Cookson ◽  
Vivian Welch ◽  
Peter Tugwell ◽  
...  

Abstract Objectives Health technology assessment (HTA) can impact health inequities by informing healthcare priority-setting decisions. This paper presents a novel checklist to guide HTA practitioners looking to include equity considerations in their work: the equity checklist for HTA (ECHTA). The list is pragmatically organized according to the generic HTA phases and can be consulted at each step. Methods A first set of items was based on the framework for equity in HTA developed by Culyer and Bombard. After rewording and reorganizing according to five HTA phases, they were complemented by elements emerging from a literature search. Consultations with method experts, decision makers, and stakeholders further refined the items. Further feedback was sought during a presentation of the tool at an international HTA conference. Lastly, the checklist was piloted through all five stages of an HTA. Results ECHTA proposes elements to be considered at each one of the five HTA phases: Scoping, Evaluation, Recommendations and Conclusions, Knowledge Translation and Implementation, and Reassessment. More than a simple checklist, the tool provides details and examples that guide the evaluators through an analysis in each phase. A pilot test is also presented, which demonstrates the ECHTA's usability and added value. Conclusions ECHTA provides guidance for HTA evaluators wishing to ensure that their conclusions do not contribute to inequalities in health. Several points to build upon the current checklist will be addressed by a working group of experts, and further feedback is welcome from evaluators who have used the tool.


2017 ◽  
Vol 44 (10) ◽  
pp. 1551-1559 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sean R. Tunis ◽  
Lara J. Maxwell ◽  
Ian D. Graham ◽  
Beverley J. Shea ◽  
Dorcas E. Beaton ◽  
...  

Objective.While there has been substantial progress in the development of core outcomes sets, the degree to which these are used by researchers is variable. We convened a special workshop on knowledge translation at the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) 2016 with 2 main goals. The first focused on the development of a formal knowledge translation framework and the second on promoting uptake of recommended core outcome domain and instrument sets.Methods.We invited all 189 OMERACT 2016 attendees to the workshop; 86 attended, representing patient research partners (n = 15), healthcare providers/clinician researchers (n = 52), industry (n = 4), regulatory agencies (n = 4), and OMERACT fellows (n = 11). Participants were given an introduction to knowledge translation and were asked to propose and discuss recommendations for the OMERACT community to (1) strengthen stakeholder involvement in the core outcome instrument set development process, and (2) promote uptake of core outcome sets with a specific focus on the potential role of post-regulatory decision makers.Results.We developed the novel “OMERACT integrated knowledge translation” framework, which formalizes OMERACT’s knowledge translation strategies. We produced strategies to improve stakeholder engagement throughout the process of core outcome set development and created a list of creative and innovative ways to promote the uptake of OMERACT’s core outcome sets.Conclusion.The guidance provided in this paper is preliminary and is based on the views of the participants. Future work will engage OMERACT groups, “post-regulatory decision makers,” and a broad range of different stakeholders to identify and evaluate the most useful methods and processes, and to revise guidance accordingly.


CrossCurrents ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 70 (4) ◽  
pp. 406-414
Author(s):  
Eugene P. Trager

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 150-156 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Evans ◽  
Clare Farmer ◽  
Jessica Saligari

2015 ◽  
Vol 66 (11) ◽  
pp. 1238-1241 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henry J. Steadman ◽  
John Monahan ◽  
Debra A. Pinals ◽  
Roumen Vesselinov ◽  
Pamela Clark Robbins

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 120-128 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Basaza ◽  
Alison Kinegyere ◽  
Boniface Mutatina ◽  
Nelson Sewankambo

Objectives: The aim of this study was to provide evidence about the design and implementation of policies for advancing the sustainability of knowledge translation (KT) initiatives and policies in Uganda's health system.Methods: We searched for and reviewed evidence about KT sustainability issues in Uganda, the impacts of options, barriers to implementing these options, and implementation strategies to address such barriers. In instances where the systematic reviews provided limited evidence, these were supplemented with relevant primary studies. Documents such as the government reports and unpublished literature were also included in the search. Key informant interviews and a policy dialogue were conducted, and an expert working group guided the study.Results: The KT sustainability issues identified were: the absence of a specific unit within the health sector to coordinate and synthesize research; health worker not familiar with KT activities and not often used. Furthermore, Uganda lacks a mechanism to sustain its current national health frameworks or platforms, and does not have a system to ensure the sustained coordination of existing national health KT platforms. The policy options proposed include: (i) the identification of a KT champion; (ii) the establishment of an operational KT framework; (iii) KT capacity building for researchers and research users, as well as policy and decision makers.Conclusions: The sustainability of KT will be influenced by the prevailing context and concerns within healthcare both in Uganda and internationally. Furthermore, the availability of resources for KT advocacy, communication, and program design will impact on the sustainability of Uganda's KT activities.


Author(s):  
Erin E Michalak ◽  
James D Livingston ◽  
Victoria Maxwell ◽  
Rachelle Hole ◽  
Lisa D Hawke ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mahima Rahman ◽  
Rafee Tamjid ◽  
Muhammed Nazmul Islam ◽  
Mushfiqur Rahman ◽  
Atonu Rabbani ◽  
...  

Knowledge Translation (KT) is a dynamic and iterative process that includes synthesizing, disseminating, exchanging, and ethically sound application of knowledge to improve health and strengthen the health care system. It facilitates sharing the information generated through research outcomes with the public, the policymakers, or others for further scaling up or continuation of the interventions. Literature suggests a substantial gap exists in communicating with the decision-makers. BRAC JPGSPH produced a documentary/video that iterates how BRAC’s revised medical treatment loan program (MTL+) works with its microcredit clients and modalities. After reviewing all possible options for communication, the video was chosen as the best knowledge translation tool. The video creation and dissemination process are comprised of four phases: pre-production, production, post-production, and exhibition. The video production team reviewed documents and articles and conducted multiple interviews before developing the script. Later, a series of interviews were taken with the beneficiaries who receive medical treatment loans, mid-level, senior managers at BRAC, and researchers. After the production, the director, with a professional editor, edited the video. Over three hours of footage was viewed and ultimately compiled into a six-minute-long video documentary. The audience for the video was more expansive than narrow; from potential beneficiaries to policymakers and every group of stakeholders in between, the video was well-understood. The new MTL+ was integrated into the main program and would be scaled up soon.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document