Introduction
Working with the World Health Organisation, Transforming Evidence has carried out a systematic review of knowledge translation (KT) practice and research priorities.
Although researchers, funders and decision-makers share an interest in maximising value from funded research, there is no clear consensus about the ways in which research can most effectively lead to societal impact. As interest in more effective and targeted funding for knowledge translation grows, it is timely to identify priority areas for funding.
For this work knowledge translation is taken to mean any process to improve the production, mobilisation and use of evidence for use in decision-making.
Our Approach
A systematic search initially identified 1941 potentially relevant studies published since 2014, more detailed analysis of the content of these studies led to the inclusion of forty-five studies in the full review. The included studies were described in terms of focus, discipline, prioritisation method, and knowledge translation research priorities.
Knowledge translation, or the mobilisation of evidence is a concern for most, if not all academic disciplinary areas. The studies included in this review were very diverse in terms of primary focus primary, which ranged from aquaculture to sexual health. These studies, in the fields of health, environmental studies, policy studies and evidence use, all used knowledge translation as part of their overall research agenda.
This is what we’ve learned so far
Overall, the most frequently reported priority was evaluation of knowledge translation strategies. There is a clear need to know more about what works, for whom, under which circumstances: which interventions and strategies are effective, including costs and benefits, role of context and transferability of interventions.
A significant amount is known about knowledge translation - key lessons from knowledge translation research must be shared more effectively. There are pockets of rich learning about working in different contexts and with different types of knowledge translation activities. Several of the studies present systematic assessments of different knowledge translation interventions, identifying gaps and clear conclusions. The knowledge translation field needs to better communicate what is already known about conceptual and practical tools to support evidence use in policy and practice.
Outputs and findings
Based on the findings of this review, we recommend:
1. Seeking to build consensus between funders to support knowledge translation strategy and research which will be relevant across disciplinary boundaries. It seems likely that there are opportunities for funding efficiencies if collaborative structures can be established. For example, working with groups which have already published in-depth prioritisation exercises,
2. Seeking existing evidence on the identified research, practice, and funding gaps to ascertain where more research and funding activity is required, and where lessons from existing lesson need to be shared to enable evidence - based knowledge translation practice.
3. Supporting evidence syntheses from the knowledge translation research to articulate key lessons from the field, and supporting wide and effective dissemination of these results to funders, publishers, decision-makers and researchers across disciplinary and policy domains.
4. Identifying groups which have already conducted in-depth prioritisation exercises, and working with them to triage priorities based on a cross-disciplinary review of the evidence.
The full report is available here: Knowledge Translation Research Priorities: an evidence synthesis