Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Health Research Policy and Systems 1/2017

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Research

The researchers’ role in knowledge translation: a realist evaluation of the development and implementation of diagnostic pathways for cancer in two United Kingdom localities

Authors: Jon Banks, Lesley Wye, Nicola Hall, James Rooney, Fiona M. Walter, Willie Hamilton, Ardiana Gjini, Greg Rubin

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

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

In examining an initiative to develop and implement new cancer diagnostic pathways in two English localities, this paper evaluates ‘what works’ and examines the role of researchers in facilitating knowledge translation amongst teams of local clinicians and policy-makers.

Methods

Using realist evaluation with a mixed methods case study approach, we conducted documentary analysis of meeting minutes and pathway iterations to map pathway development. We interviewed 14 participants to identify the contexts, mechanisms and outcomes (CMOs) that led to successful pathway development and implementation. Interviews were analysed thematically and four CMO configurations were developed.

Results

One site produced three fully implemented pathways, while the other produced two that were partly implemented. In explaining the differences, we found that a respected, independent, well-connected leader modelling partnership working and who facilitates a local, stable group that agree about the legitimacy of the data and project (context) can empower local teams to become sufficiently autonomous (mechanism) to develop and implement research-based pathways (outcome). Although both teams designed relevant, research-based cancer pathways, in the site where the pathways were successfully implemented the research team merely assisted, while, in the other, the research team drove the initiative.

Conclusion

Based on our study findings, local stakeholders can apply local and research knowledge to develop and implement research-based pathways. However, success will depend on how academics empower local teams to create autonomy. Crucially, after re-packaging and translating research for local circumstances, identifying fertile environments with the right elements for implementation and developing collaborative relationships with local leaders, academics must step back.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Hamilton W. Cancer diagnosis in primary care. Brit J Gen Pract. 2010;60(571):121–8.CrossRef Hamilton W. Cancer diagnosis in primary care. Brit J Gen Pract. 2010;60(571):121–8.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Referral Guidelines for Suspected Cancer. London: NICE; 2005. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Referral Guidelines for Suspected Cancer. London: NICE; 2005.
4.
go back to reference Hamilton W, Green T, Martins T, Elliott K, Rubin G, Macleod U. Evaluation of risk assessment tools for suspected cancer in general practice: a cohort study. Brit J Gen Pract. 2013;63(606):20–1.CrossRef Hamilton W, Green T, Martins T, Elliott K, Rubin G, Macleod U. Evaluation of risk assessment tools for suspected cancer in general practice: a cohort study. Brit J Gen Pract. 2013;63(606):20–1.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic Evaluation. London: Sage; 1997. Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic Evaluation. London: Sage; 1997.
9.
10.
go back to reference Hamilton W, Green T, Martins T, Elliot K, Rubin G, Macleod U. Evaluation of risk assessment tools for suspected cancer in general practice: a cohort study. Brit J Gen Pract. 2013;63(606):e30–e6.CrossRef Hamilton W, Green T, Martins T, Elliot K, Rubin G, Macleod U. Evaluation of risk assessment tools for suspected cancer in general practice: a cohort study. Brit J Gen Pract. 2013;63(606):e30–e6.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Stapley S, Peters TJ, Neal RD, Rose PW, Walter FM, Hamilton W. The risk of pancreatic cancer in symptomatic patients in primary care: a large case-control study using electronic records. Br J Cancer. 2012;106(12):1940–4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Stapley S, Peters TJ, Neal RD, Rose PW, Walter FM, Hamilton W. The risk of pancreatic cancer in symptomatic patients in primary care: a large case-control study using electronic records. Br J Cancer. 2012;106(12):1940–4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
go back to reference Hamilton W. The CAPER studies: five case-control studies aimed at identifying and quantifying the risk of cancer in symptomatic primary care patients. Br J Cancer. 2009;101 Suppl 2:S80–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Hamilton W. The CAPER studies: five case-control studies aimed at identifying and quantifying the risk of cancer in symptomatic primary care patients. Br J Cancer. 2009;101 Suppl 2:S80–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
go back to reference Banks J, Hollinghurst S, Bigwood L, Peters TJ, Walter FM, Hamilton W. Preferences for cancer investigation: a vignette-based study of primary-care attendees. Lancet Oncology. 2013;15(2):232–40.CrossRef Banks J, Hollinghurst S, Bigwood L, Peters TJ, Walter FM, Hamilton W. Preferences for cancer investigation: a vignette-based study of primary-care attendees. Lancet Oncology. 2013;15(2):232–40.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Yin R. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. 5th ed. London: SAGE Publications Ltd; 2014. Yin R. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. 5th ed. London: SAGE Publications Ltd; 2014.
16.
go back to reference Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101.CrossRef Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference NVivo qualitative data analysis Software; QSR International Pty Ltd. Version 10, 2012. NVivo qualitative data analysis Software; QSR International Pty Ltd. Version 10, 2012.
18.
go back to reference Penfield T, Baker MJ, Scoble R, Wykes MC. Assessment, evaluations, and definitions of research impact: a review. Res Eval. 2014;23(1):21–32.CrossRef Penfield T, Baker MJ, Scoble R, Wykes MC. Assessment, evaluations, and definitions of research impact: a review. Res Eval. 2014;23(1):21–32.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Pohl C, Rist S, Zimmermann A, Fry P, Gurung GS, Schneider F, et al. Researchers' roles in knowledge co-production: experience from sustainability research in Kenya, Switzerland, Bolivia and Nepal. Sci Public Policy. 2010;37(4):267–81.CrossRef Pohl C, Rist S, Zimmermann A, Fry P, Gurung GS, Schneider F, et al. Researchers' roles in knowledge co-production: experience from sustainability research in Kenya, Switzerland, Bolivia and Nepal. Sci Public Policy. 2010;37(4):267–81.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Scheel IB, Hagen KB, Oxman AD. The unbearable lightness of healthcare policy making: a description of a process aimed at giving it some weight. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2003;57(7):483–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Scheel IB, Hagen KB, Oxman AD. The unbearable lightness of healthcare policy making: a description of a process aimed at giving it some weight. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2003;57(7):483–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
The researchers’ role in knowledge translation: a realist evaluation of the development and implementation of diagnostic pathways for cancer in two United Kingdom localities
Authors
Jon Banks
Lesley Wye
Nicola Hall
James Rooney
Fiona M. Walter
Willie Hamilton
Ardiana Gjini
Greg Rubin
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/s12961-017-0267-8

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

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