Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Health Research Policy and Systems
Published in: Health Research Policy and Systems 1/2017

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Opinion

Transferring research from a university to the United Kingdom National Health Service: the implications for impact

Author: Helen Payne

Published in: Health Research Policy and Systems | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

The aim of this article is to inform readers of the author’s reflections on the experience of transferring university-based research into the commercial sector, and of the processes and strategies employed when preparing for impact in so doing. Concepts for the transfer are illustrated by the author’s reflection on aspects that arose during the birthing and subsequent start-up of a university spin-off, Pathways2Wellbeing, a form of reflection-on-action. This is the vehicle for the adaption required to transfer research into the delivery of a specialised clinic in the United Kingdom National Health Service for people with medically unexplained, persistent, bodily symptoms such as fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue and chronic pain. It is hoped that the article will provide readers with an insight into how knowledge transfer can take place through engagement with stakeholders to create an exchange of knowledges to result in impact on health service policy for service users, despite the challenges, and the enablers that facilitated this process. The reflections on the process of knowledge transfer and the implications for impact are underpinned by relevant theory.
Literature
1.
Jacobson N, Butterill D, Goering P. Development of a framework for knowledge translation: understanding user context. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2003;8(2):94–9.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Mitton C, Adair CE, Mckenzie E, Patten SB, Waye PB. Knowledge transfer and exchange: review and synthesis of the literature. Milbank Q. 2007;85(4):729–68.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
Elueze IN. Evaluating the effectiveness of knowledge brokering in health research: a systematised review with some bibliometric information. Health Info Libr J. 2015;32:168–81.CrossRefPubMed
4.
D’Este P, Patel P. University–industry linkages in the UK: what are the factors underlying the variety of interactions with industry? Res Policy. 2007;36:1295–313.CrossRef
5.
Louis KS, Jones LM, Anderson MS, Blumenthal D, Campbell EG. Entrepreneurship, secrecy, and productivity: a comparison of clinical and non-clinical life sciences faculty. J Technol Transfer. 2001;26:233–45.CrossRef
6.
Nilsson AS, Rickne A, Bengtsson L. Transfer of academic research: uncovering the grey zone. J Technol Transfer. 2010;35:617–36.CrossRef
7.
Schartinger D, Rammer C, Fischer MM, Fröhlich J. Knowledge interactions between universities and industry in Austria: sectoral patterns and determinants. Res Policy. 2002;31:303–28.CrossRef
8.
9.
Bornmann L. What is societal impact of research and how can it be assessed? A literature survey. J Am Soc Info Sci Technol. 2013;64(2):217–33.CrossRef
10.
Stern N. Building on Success and Learning from Experience an Independent Review of the Research Excellence Framework. London: UK Government, Ministry of Universities and Science; 2016.
11.
12.
13.
Hemsley-Brown J, Oplatka I. Bridging the research-practice gap: barriers and facilitators to research use among school principals from England and Israel. Int J Public Sector Manage. 2005;18(4/5):424–46.CrossRef
14.
Kirst MW. Bridging education research and education policymaking. Oxford Rev Educ. 2000;26(3/4):379–91.CrossRef
15.
Perkmann M, Tartari V, McKelvey M, Autio E, Broström A, D’Este P, Riccardo P, et al. Academic engagement and commercialisation: a review of the literature on university– industry relations. Res Policy. 2013;42(2):423–42.
16.
Martinelli A, Meyer M, von Tunzelmann N. Becoming an entrepreneurial university: a case study of knowledge exchange relationships and faculty attitudes in a medium-sized, research-oriented university. J Technol Transfer. 2008;33(3):259–83.CrossRef
17.
Landry N, Amara N, Quimet M. Determinants of knowledge transfer: evidence from Canadian university researchers in natural sciences and engineering. J Technol Transfer. 2007;32(6):561–92.CrossRef
18.
19.
20.
Straus SE, Titroe JM, Graham ID. Knowledge translation is the use of knowledge in health care decision making. J Epidemiol. 2011;64(1):6–10.
21.
22.
23.
24.
Bird R. Redefining roles and identities in higher education: the liminal example of a university spinout company. J High Educ Politics Manage. 2015;37(6):633–45.CrossRef
25.
26.
27.
Payne H. Medically unexplained conditions and The BodyMind Approach. Counsel Prim Care Rev. 2009;10(1):6–8.
28.
Payne H. The BodyMind Approach to psychotherapeutic group work with patients with medically unexplained symptoms: a review of the literature, description of approach and methodology selected for a pilot study. Eur J Couns Psychother. 2009;11(3):287–310.CrossRef
29.
Payne H. Pilot study to evaluate Dance Movement Psychotherapy (the BodyMind Approach) with patients with medically unexplained symptoms: participant and facilitator perceptions and a summary discussion. Int J Body Movement Dance Psychother. 2009;5(2):95–106.
30.
Payne H, Stott D. Change in the moving bodymind: quantitative results from a pilot study on the BodyMind Approach (BMA) as group work for patients with medically unexplained symptoms (MUS). Counselling Psychother Res. 2010;25(4):295–307.CrossRef
31.
Bermingham S, Cohen S, Hague J, Parsonage M. The cost of somatisation among the working-age population in England for the year 2008-09. Mental Health Family Med. 2010;7:71–84.
32.
Gonzalez J, Williams JW, Noel PH, Lee S. Adherence to mental health treatment in a primary care clinic. J Am Board Family Pract. 2005;18:87–96.CrossRef
33.
Payne H, Brooks S. Moving on: The BodyMind Approach™ for medically unexplained symptoms. Public Mental Health J. 2017;10(2):1–9.
34.
Rosch E, Thompson E, Varela FJ. The Embodied Mind: Cognitive Science and Human Experience. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1992. p. 172–3.
35.
36.
37.
38.
Payne H. Patient experience: push past symptom mysteries. Health Serv J. 2014;124(6390):26–7.PubMed
39.
Payne H, Brooks S. Different Strokes for Different Folks: The BodyMind Approach for Supporting People with Medically Unexplained Symptoms to Self-manage, Presentation at 2017 National Summit on Medically Unexplained Symptoms. Birmingham: UH Health and Tavistock & Portman NHS Trust; 2017.
40.
Poliakoff E, Webb TL. What factors predict scientists’ intentions to participate in public engagement of science activities? Sci Commun. 2007;29(2):242–63.CrossRef
41.
Payne H. The Body speaks its mind: The BodyMind Approach™ for patients with medically unexplained symptoms in UK primary care. Arts Psychother. 2015;42:19–27.CrossRef
42.
Payne H, Brooks S. Clinical outcomes and cost benefits from The BodyMind Approach™ for patients with medically unexplained symptoms in primary health care in England: practice-based evidence. Arts Psychother. 2016;47:55–65.CrossRef
43.
Raftery J, Hanney S, Greenhalgh T, Glover M, Blatch-Jones A. Models and applications for measuring the impact of health research: Update of a systematic review for the Health Technology Assessment Programme. Health Technol Assess. 2016;20:76.CrossRef
44.
Guthrie S, Wamae W, Diepeveen S, Wooding S, Grant J. Measuring Research: A Guide to Research Evaluation Frameworks and Tools. Arlington, VA: RAND Corporation; 2013.
45.
46.
Scott JE, Blansinsky M, Dufor M, Mandal RJ, Philogene GS. An evaluation of the Mind–Body Interactions and Health Program: assessing the impact of an NIH program using the Payback Framework. Res Eval. 2011;20(3):185–92. doi:10.​3152/​095820211X129413​71876661.CrossRef
47.
Brown JS, Duguid P. Organizing Knowledge. California Manage Rev. 1998;40(3):90–111.CrossRef
48.
Becheikh N, Ziam S, Idrissi O, Castonguay Y, Landry R. How to improve knowledge transfer strategies and practices in education? Answers from a systematic literature review. Res Higher Educ. 2010;7:1–21.
49.
Hemsley-Brown J. Using research to support management decision making within the field of education. Manage Decision. 2005;43(5/6):691–705.
50.
51.
Lawson B, Potter A. Determinants of knowledge transfer in inter-firm new product development projects. Int J Oper Product Manage. 2012;32(10):1228–47.
52.
Oborn E, Barrett M, Racko G. Knowledge translation in healthcare: incorporating theories of learning and knowledge from the management literature. J Health Organ Manage. 2013;27(4):412–31.
Metadata
Title
Transferring research from a university to the United Kingdom National Health Service: the implications for impact
Author
Helen Payne
Publication date
01-12-2017
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Health Research Policy and Systems / Issue 1/2017
Electronic ISSN: 1478-4505
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-017-0219-3

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

Health Research Policy and Systems 1/2017 Go to the issue

Study Protocol

Maximising value from a United Kingdom Biomedical Research Centre: study protocol

Review

Underutilisation of routinely collected data in the HIV programme in Zambia: a review of quantitatively analysed peer-reviewed articles

Review

Operations research in global health: a scoping review with a focus on the themes of health equity and impact

Research

Requirements of health policy and services journals for authors to disclose financial and non-financial conflicts of interest: a cross-sectional study

Research

The concept of ‘vulnerability’ in research ethics: an in-depth analysis of policies and guidelines

Research

A mixed-methods study of system-level sustainability of evidence-based practices in 12 large-scale implementation initiatives