Knowledge translation in health: how implementation science could contribute more.
Background: Despite increasing interest in research on how to translate knowledge into practice and improve healthcare, the accumulation of scientific knowledge in this field is slow. Few substantial new insights have become available in the last decade.Main Body: Various problems hinder development...
| Publicado en: | BMC Medicine Vol. 17; no. 1 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , |
| Formato: | Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
BioMed Central
5/7/2019
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=136274233&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 136274233 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 17417015 1CI2 jtl: BMC Medicine issn: 17417015 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: 5/7/2019 vid: 17 iid: 1 pid: 24147 pub: BioMed Central artinfo: ui: 136274233 136274233 NLM31064388 10.1186/s12916-019-1322-9 NLM31064388 136274233 ppct: 1 formats: tig: atl: Knowledge translation in health: how implementation science could contribute more. aug: au: Wensing, Michel Grol, Richard affil: Department of General Practice and Health Services Research, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld, 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany sug: subj: Quality Improvement Standards Research, Medical Research, Medical Standards Quality Improvement Trends Health Policy Trends Knowledge Study Design Ways of Coping Questionnaire ab: Background: Despite increasing interest in research on how to translate knowledge into practice and improve healthcare, the accumulation of scientific knowledge in this field is slow. Few substantial new insights have become available in the last decade.Main Body: Various problems hinder development in this field. There is a frequent misfit between problems and approaches to implementation, resulting in the use of implementation strategies that do not match with the targeted problems. The proliferation of concepts, theories and frameworks for knowledge transfer - many of which are untested - has not advanced the field. Stakeholder involvement is regarded as crucial for successful knowledge implementation, but many approaches are poorly specified and unvalidated. Despite the apparent decreased appreciation of rigorous designs for effect evaluation, such as randomized trials, these should remain within the portfolio of implementation research. Outcome measures for knowledge implementation tend to be crude, but it is important to integrate patient preferences and the increased precision of knowledge.Conclusions: We suggest that the research enterprise be redesigned in several ways to address these problems and enhance scientific progress in the interests of patients and populations. It is crucially important to establish substantial programmes of research on implementation and improvement in healthcare, and better recognize the societal and practical benefits of research. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|