Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Tygerberg, South Africa.
Policy and Evaluation Division, International Development Research Centre, Ottawa, Canada.
Health Res Policy Syst. 2018 May 24;16(1):44. doi: 10.1186/s12961-018-0316-y.
It is widely accepted that research can lead to improved health outcomes. However, translating research into meaningful impacts in peoples' lives requires actions that stretch well beyond those traditionally associated with knowledge creation. The research reported in this manuscript provides an international review of health research funders' efforts to encourage this process of research uptake, application and scaling, often referred to as knowledge translation.
We conducted web-site review, document review and key informant interviews to investigate knowledge translation at 26 research funding agencies. The sample comprises the regions of Australia, Europe and North America, and a diverse range of funder types, including biomedical, clinical, multi-health domain, philanthropic, public and private organisations. The data builds on a 2008 study by the authors with the same international sample, which permitted longitudinal trend analysis.
Knowledge translation is an objective of growing significance for funders across each region studied. However, there is no clear international consensus or standard on how funders might support knowledge translation. We found that approaches and mechanisms vary across region and funder type. Strategically tailored funding opportunities (grants) are the most prevalent modality of support. The most common funder-driven strategy for knowledge translation within these grants is the linking of researchers to research users. Funders could not to provide empirical evidence to support the majority of the knowledge translation activities they encourage or undertake.
Knowledge translation at a research funder relies on context. Accordingly, we suggest that the diversity of approaches uncovered in our research is fitting. We argue that evaluation of funding agency efforts to promote and/or support knowledge translation should be prioritised and actioned. It is paradoxical that funders' efforts to get evidence into practice are not themselves evidence based.
人们普遍认为，研究可以带来改善健康的结果。然而，将研究转化为人们生活中的实际影响需要采取超出传统知识创造范畴的行动。本文报告的研究对 26 家卫生研究资助机构鼓励这一研究吸收、应用和扩展过程的努力进行了国际审查，这一过程通常被称为知识转化。
我们通过网站审查、文件审查和关键知情人访谈，调查了 26 个研究资助机构的知识转化情况。该样本包括澳大利亚、欧洲和北美地区，以及各种类型的资助者，包括生物医学、临床、多健康领域、慈善、公共和私营组织。这些数据建立在作者 2008 年进行的一项国际研究的基础上，该研究允许进行纵向趋势分析。
知识转化对于每个研究地区的资助者来说都是一个越来越重要的目标。然而，对于资助者如何支持知识转化，目前还没有明确的国际共识或标准。我们发现，方法和机制因地区和资助者类型而异。有针对性的资助机会（拨款）是最普遍的支持模式。在这些拨款中，资助者最常见的知识转化策略是将研究人员与研究使用者联系起来。资助者无法为他们鼓励或开展的大多数知识转化活动提供经验证据。
研究资助者的知识转化依赖于背景。因此，我们认为，我们研究中发现的方法多样性是合适的。我们认为，应该优先重视和采取对资助机构促进和/或支持知识转化的努力进行评估。具有讽刺意味的是，资助者将证据应用于实践的努力本身并不是基于证据的。
