Boyko Jennifer A, Carter Nancy, Bryant-Lukosius Denise
Postdoctoral Fellow, Faculty of Health Sciences and Faculty of Information & Media Studies, Western University, London, ON, Canada.
Assistant Professor, School of Nursing, Affiliate, Canadian Centre for Advanced Practice Nursing Research, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Worldviews Evid Based Nurs. 2016 Aug;13(4):277-84. doi: 10.1111/wvn.12160. Epub 2016 Apr 13.
Health system researchers must ensure that the products of their work meet the needs of various stakeholder groups (e.g., patients, practitioners, and policy makers). Evidence-based frameworks can support the uptake and spread of research evidence; however, their existence as knowledge translation tools does not ensure their uptake and it is difficult to ascertain their spread into research, practice, and policy using existing methods.
The purpose of this article is to report results of a study on the spread and uptake of an evidence-based framework (i.e., the participatory, evidence-based, patient-focused process for advanced practice nursing [PEPPA] framework) into research, practice, and policies relevant to the introduction and evaluation of advanced practice nursing roles. We also reflect on the utility of using a modified citation methodology to evaluate knowledge translation efforts.
We searched four databases for literature published between 2004 and 2014 citing the original paper in which the PEPPA framework was published, and carried out an Internet search for grey literature using keywords. Relevant data were extracted from sources and organized using NVivo software. We analysed results descriptively.
Our search yielded 164 unique sources of which 69.5% were from published literature and the majority (83.4%) of these were published in nursing journals. Most frequently (71.5%), the framework was used by researchers and students in research studies. A smaller number of citations (11.3%) reflected use of the PEPPA framework in practice settings with a focus on role development, implementation, evaluation, or a combination of these.
This study demonstrates that the PEPPA framework has been used to varying degrees as intended, and provides guidance on how to evaluate the spread and uptake of research outputs (e.g., theoretical frameworks). Further research is needed about ways to determine whether evidence-informed research tools such as frameworks have been taken up successfully into practice and policy contexts.
卫生系统研究人员必须确保其工作成果满足不同利益相关者群体(如患者、从业者和政策制定者)的需求。基于证据的框架可以支持研究证据的采用和传播;然而,它们作为知识转化工具的存在并不能确保其被采用,并且使用现有方法难以确定它们在研究、实践和政策中的传播情况。
本文旨在报告一项关于基于证据的框架(即高级实践护理的参与式、基于证据、以患者为中心的过程[PEPPA]框架)在与高级实践护理角色的引入和评估相关的研究、实践和政策中的传播和采用情况的研究结果。我们还反思了使用改进的引用方法来评估知识转化工作的效用。
我们在四个数据库中搜索了2004年至2014年间引用发表PEPPA框架的原始论文的文献,并使用关键词在互联网上搜索灰色文献。从来源中提取相关数据并使用NVivo软件进行整理。我们对结果进行了描述性分析。
我们的搜索产生了164个独特的来源,其中69.5%来自已发表的文献,其中大多数(83.4%)发表在护理期刊上。最常见的情况(71.5%)是,该框架被研究人员和学生用于研究中。较少数量的引用(11.3%)反映了PEPPA框架在实践环境中的使用,重点是角色发展、实施、评估或这些方面的组合。
本研究表明,PEPPA框架已按预期得到不同程度的使用,并为如何评估研究成果(如理论框架)的传播和采用提供了指导。需要进一步研究确定诸如框架等基于证据的研究工具是否已成功应用于实践和政策背景的方法。