Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Health Services Research 1/2019

Open Access 01-12-2019 | Debate

Translating academic research into guidance to support healthcare improvement: how should guidance development be reported?

Authors: Simon Turner, Charlotte A. Sharp, Jessica Sheringham, Shaun Leamon, Naomi J. Fulop

Published in: BMC Health Services Research | Issue 1/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

There is interest internationally in improving the uptake of research evidence to inform health care quality and safety. This article focusses on guidance development from research studies as one method for improving research uptake. While we recognise that implementation strategies on the ´demand´ side for encouraging the uptake of research are important, e.g. knowledge brokers and university-practice collaborations, this article focusses on the ´production´ aspect of how guidance development is reported and the consequent influence this may have on end-users´ receptivity to evidence, in addition to other demand-side processes.

Main text

The article considers the following question: how is guidance developed and what are the implications for reporting? We address this question by reviewing examples of guidance development reporting from applied health research studies, then describe how we produced guidance for a national study of evidence use in decision-making on adopting innovations. The starting point for reflecting on our experiences is a vignette of the guidance ´launch´ event at a national conference.

Conclusions

Implications for reporting guidance development and supporting improvement are discussed. These include the need to (a) produce reporting standards for the production of guidance to match reporting standards for other research methods, (b) acknowledge the ´informal´ or emergent aspects of producing guidance and its role within a wider knowledge mobilization strategy, (c) consider guidance development from projects as part of a wider knowledge mobilization strategy, and (d) encourage a receptive environment for guidance development and use, including researcher training, durable funding to support impact, and closer relations between research and practice.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Morris ZS, Wooding S, Grant J. The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research. J R Soc Med. 2011;104(12):510–20.CrossRef Morris ZS, Wooding S, Grant J. The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research. J R Soc Med. 2011;104(12):510–20.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE, Kirsh SR, Alexander JA, Lowery JC. Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implement Sci. 2009;4(1):50.CrossRef Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE, Kirsh SR, Alexander JA, Lowery JC. Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implement Sci. 2009;4(1):50.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Orem JN, Mafigiri DK, Marchal B, Ssengooba F, Macq J, Criel B. Research, evidence and policymaking: the perspectives of policy actors on improving uptake of evidence in health policy development and implementation in Uganda. BMC Public Health. 2012;12(1):109.CrossRef Orem JN, Mafigiri DK, Marchal B, Ssengooba F, Macq J, Criel B. Research, evidence and policymaking: the perspectives of policy actors on improving uptake of evidence in health policy development and implementation in Uganda. BMC Public Health. 2012;12(1):109.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Langlois EV, Daniels K, Akl EA. Evidence synthesis for health policy and systems: a methods guide. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2018. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO Langlois EV, Daniels K, Akl EA. Evidence synthesis for health policy and systems: a methods guide. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2018. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO
6.
go back to reference Best A, Holmes B. Systems thinking, knowledge and action: towards better models and methods. Evidence and Policy. 2010;6(2):145–59.CrossRef Best A, Holmes B. Systems thinking, knowledge and action: towards better models and methods. Evidence and Policy. 2010;6(2):145–59.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Russell DJ, Rivard LM, Walter SD, Rosenbaum PL, Roxborough L, Cameron D, Darrah J, Bartlett DJ, Hanna SE, Avery LM. Using knowledge brokers to facilitate the uptake of pediatric measurement tools into clinical practice: a before-after intervention study. Implement Sci. 2010;5(1):92.CrossRef Russell DJ, Rivard LM, Walter SD, Rosenbaum PL, Roxborough L, Cameron D, Darrah J, Bartlett DJ, Hanna SE, Avery LM. Using knowledge brokers to facilitate the uptake of pediatric measurement tools into clinical practice: a before-after intervention study. Implement Sci. 2010;5(1):92.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Oliver K, Innvar S, Lorenc T, Woodman J, Thomas J. A systematic review of barriers to and facilitators of the use of evidence by policymakers. BMC Health Services Research. 2014;14(1):2.CrossRef Oliver K, Innvar S, Lorenc T, Woodman J, Thomas J. A systematic review of barriers to and facilitators of the use of evidence by policymakers. BMC Health Services Research. 2014;14(1):2.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Sharp CA, Dixon WG, Boaden R, Sanders C. The means not the end: Stakeholder views of toolkits developed from healthcare research in: Nugus P, Denis JL, Chenevert D and Rodriguez C (Eds) Transitions and Boundaries in the Coordination and Reform of Health Services, Organizational Behaviour in Healthcare, Palgrave MacMillan. 2020:295–316. Sharp CA, Dixon WG, Boaden R, Sanders C. The means not the end: Stakeholder views of toolkits developed from healthcare research in: Nugus P, Denis JL, Chenevert D and Rodriguez C (Eds) Transitions and Boundaries in the Coordination and Reform of Health Services, Organizational Behaviour in Healthcare, Palgrave MacMillan. 2020:295–316.
13.
go back to reference Lavis JN, Robertson D, Woodside JM, McLeod CB, Abelson J. How can research organizations more effectively transfer research knowledge to decision makers? Milbank Q. 2003;81:221–48.CrossRef Lavis JN, Robertson D, Woodside JM, McLeod CB, Abelson J. How can research organizations more effectively transfer research knowledge to decision makers? Milbank Q. 2003;81:221–48.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Carpenter D, Nieva V, Albaghal T, et al. Development of a Planning Tool to Guide Research Dissemination. In: Henriksen K, Battles JB, Marks ES, et al., editors. Advances in Patient Safety: From Research to Implementation (Volume 4: Programs, Tools, and Products). Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality US; 2005. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK20603/. Carpenter D, Nieva V, Albaghal T, et al. Development of a Planning Tool to Guide Research Dissemination. In: Henriksen K, Battles JB, Marks ES, et al., editors. Advances in Patient Safety: From Research to Implementation (Volume 4: Programs, Tools, and Products). Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality US; 2005. Available from: https://​www.​ncbi.​nlm.​nih.​gov/​books/​NBK20603/​.
15.
go back to reference Goering P, Ross S, Jacobson N. Developing a guide to support the knowledge translation component of the grant application process. Evidence & Policy. 2010;6(1):91–102.CrossRef Goering P, Ross S, Jacobson N. Developing a guide to support the knowledge translation component of the grant application process. Evidence & Policy. 2010;6(1):91–102.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Westhrop G, et al. Development of methodological guidance, publication standards and training materials for realist and meta-narrative reviews: the RAMESES realist and meta-narrative evidence syntheses: evolving standards project. Health Serv Deliv Res. 2014;2(30).CrossRef Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Westhrop G, et al. Development of methodological guidance, publication standards and training materials for realist and meta-narrative reviews: the RAMESES realist and meta-narrative evidence syntheses: evolving standards project. Health Serv Deliv Res. 2014;2(30).CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Bennett M, Mulvey M, Campling N, et al. Self-management toolkit and delivery strategy for end-of-life pain: the mixed-methods feasibility study. Health Technol Assess. 2017;21(76).CrossRef Bennett M, Mulvey M, Campling N, et al. Self-management toolkit and delivery strategy for end-of-life pain: the mixed-methods feasibility study. Health Technol Assess. 2017;21(76).CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Waterman H, Tillen D, Dickson R, et al. Action research: a systematic review and guidance for assessment. Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(23). Waterman H, Tillen D, Dickson R, et al. Action research: a systematic review and guidance for assessment. Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(23).
19.
go back to reference Anderson J, Robert GB, Nunes FG, Bal R, Burnett S, Karltun A, Sanne J, Aase K, Wiig S, Fulop NJ. Translating research on quality improvement in five European countries into a reflective guide for hospital leaders: the ‘QUASER Hospital Guide’. 2019:mzz055. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzz055. Anderson J, Robert GB, Nunes FG, Bal R, Burnett S, Karltun A, Sanne J, Aase K, Wiig S, Fulop NJ. Translating research on quality improvement in five European countries into a reflective guide for hospital leaders: the ‘QUASER Hospital Guide’. 2019:mzz055. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1093/​intqhc/​mzz055.
20.
go back to reference Turner S, Morris S, Sheringham J, Hudson E, Fulop NJ. Study protocol: DEcisions in health care to introduce or diffuse innovations using evidence DECIDE. Implement Sci. 2015 Dec;11(1):48.CrossRef Turner S, Morris S, Sheringham J, Hudson E, Fulop NJ. Study protocol: DEcisions in health care to introduce or diffuse innovations using evidence DECIDE. Implement Sci. 2015 Dec;11(1):48.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Latour B, Woolgar S. Laboratory life: the social construction of scientific facts. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1986. Latour B, Woolgar S. Laboratory life: the social construction of scientific facts. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1986.
22.
go back to reference Wittgenstein L. Philosophical investigations. Malden: Blackwell Publishing; 1958. Wittgenstein L. Philosophical investigations. Malden: Blackwell Publishing; 1958.
23.
go back to reference Turner S, Higginson J, Oborne CA, Thomas RE, Ramsay AI, Fulop NJ. Codifying knowledge to improve patient safety: a qualitative study of practice-based interventions. Soc Sci Med. 2014 Jul 1;113:169–76.CrossRef Turner S, Higginson J, Oborne CA, Thomas RE, Ramsay AI, Fulop NJ. Codifying knowledge to improve patient safety: a qualitative study of practice-based interventions. Soc Sci Med. 2014 Jul 1;113:169–76.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Law J. After method: mess in social science research. London: Routledge; 2004.CrossRef Law J. After method: mess in social science research. London: Routledge; 2004.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Preda A. Financial knowledge. Documents, and the Structures of Financial Services, Journal of Contemporary Ethnography. 2002;31(2):207–39.CrossRef Preda A. Financial knowledge. Documents, and the Structures of Financial Services, Journal of Contemporary Ethnography. 2002;31(2):207–39.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151:264–69.CrossRef Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151:264–69.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Ogrinc G, Davies L, Goodman D, et al. SQUIRE 2.0 (Standards for QUality Improvement Reporting Excellence): revised publication guidelines from a detailed consensus process. BMJ Qual Saf. 2016;25:986–92.CrossRef Ogrinc G, Davies L, Goodman D, et al. SQUIRE 2.0 (Standards for QUality Improvement Reporting Excellence): revised publication guidelines from a detailed consensus process. BMJ Qual Saf. 2016;25:986–92.CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;196:349–57.CrossRef Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;196:349–57.CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Timmermans S, Tavory I. Theory construction in qualitative research: from grounded theory to abductive analysis. Sociological theory. 2012;30(3):167–86.CrossRef Timmermans S, Tavory I. Theory construction in qualitative research: from grounded theory to abductive analysis. Sociological theory. 2012;30(3):167–86.CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Barratt, Helen, et al. “Health Services Research: Building Capacity to Meet the Needs of the Health Care System.” Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, vol. 22, no. 4, 2017, pp. 243–249, Barratt, Helen, et al. “Health Services Research: Building Capacity to Meet the Needs of the Health Care System.” Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, vol. 22, no. 4, 2017, pp. 243–249,
33.
go back to reference Vindrola-Padros C, Pape T, Utley M, et al. The role of embedded research in quality improvement: a narrative review. BMJ Quality & Safety. 2017;26:70–80.CrossRef Vindrola-Padros C, Pape T, Utley M, et al. The role of embedded research in quality improvement: a narrative review. BMJ Quality & Safety. 2017;26:70–80.CrossRef
34.
go back to reference Turner S, D’Lima D, Hudson E, Morris S, Sheringham J, Swart N, Fulop NJ. Evidence use in decision-making on introducing innovations: a systematic scoping review with stakeholder feedback. Implement Sci. 2017 Dec;12(1):145.CrossRef Turner S, D’Lima D, Hudson E, Morris S, Sheringham J, Swart N, Fulop NJ. Evidence use in decision-making on introducing innovations: a systematic scoping review with stakeholder feedback. Implement Sci. 2017 Dec;12(1):145.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Translating academic research into guidance to support healthcare improvement: how should guidance development be reported?
Authors
Simon Turner
Charlotte A. Sharp
Jessica Sheringham
Shaun Leamon
Naomi J. Fulop
Publication date
01-12-2019
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Health Services Research / Issue 1/2019
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6963
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-019-4792-8

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

BMC Health Services Research 1/2019 Go to the issue