Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, YO10 5DD, UK.
Implement Sci. 2010 Aug 4;5:61. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-5-61.
In the UK, most funding bodies now expect a commitment or effort on the part of grant holders to disseminate the findings of their research. The emphasis is on ensuring that publicly funded research is made available, can be used to support decision making, and ultimately improve the quality and delivery of healthcare provided. In this study, we aimed to describe the dissemination practices and impacts of applied and public health researchers working across the UK.
We conducted a survey of 485 UK-based principal investigators of publicly funded applied and public health research. Participants were contacted by email and invited to complete an online questionnaire via an embedded URL. Gift vouchers were given to all participants who completed the questionnaire. Four reminder emails were sent out to non-respondents at one, two, three, and four weeks; a fifth postal reminder was also undertaken.
A total of 243/485 (50%) questionnaires were returned (232 completed, 11 declining to participate). Most researchers recognise the importance of and appear committed to research dissemination. However, most dissemination activity beyond the publishing of academic papers appears to be undertaken an ad hoc fashion. There is some evidence that access to dissemination advice and support may facilitate more policy interactions; though access to such resources is lacking at an institutional level, and advice from funders can be variable. Although a minority of respondents routinely record details about the impact of their research, when asked about impact in relation to specific research projects most were able to provide simple narrative descriptions.
Researchers recognise the importance of and appear committed to disseminating the findings of their work. Although researchers are focussed on academic publication, a range of dissemination activities are being applied albeit in an ad hoc fashion. However, what constitutes effective dissemination (in terms of impact and return on investment) remains unclear. Researchers need greater and clearer guidance on how best to plan, resource, and facilitate their dissemination activities.
在英国,大多数资助机构现在都期望资助获得者承诺或努力传播他们研究的发现。重点是确保公共资助的研究是可用的,可以用于支持决策,并最终提高所提供医疗保健的质量和交付。在这项研究中,我们旨在描述在英国各地工作的应用和公共卫生研究人员的传播实践和影响。
我们对 485 名英国公共资助的应用和公共卫生研究的主要研究者进行了调查。通过电子邮件联系参与者,并邀请他们通过嵌入式 URL 完成在线问卷。我们向所有完成问卷的参与者提供礼品券。在一周、两周、三周和四周时向未回复者发送了四封提醒电子邮件;还进行了第五次邮寄提醒。
共有 243/485(50%)份问卷被退回(232 份完整,11 份拒绝参与)。大多数研究人员认识到研究传播的重要性并似乎致力于研究传播。然而,除了发表学术论文之外,大多数传播活动似乎都是临时进行的。有一些证据表明,获得传播建议和支持可能会促进更多的政策互动;尽管机构层面缺乏获取这些资源的途径,而且资助者的建议可能会有所不同。虽然少数受访者通常会记录他们研究影响的详细信息,但当被问及特定研究项目的影响时,大多数人都能够提供简单的叙述描述。
研究人员认识到传播他们工作成果的重要性并似乎致力于传播。虽然研究人员专注于学术出版,但一系列传播活动正在应用,尽管是以临时的方式。然而,什么构成有效的传播(就影响和投资回报而言)仍然不清楚。研究人员需要更清晰、更明确的指导,了解如何最好地规划、资源和促进他们的传播活动。