• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

精神健康体验知识用户参与混合方法系统综述:来自硕士论文的反思和经验教训。

Engaging Knowledge Users with Mental Health Experience in a Mixed-Methods Systematic Review of Post-secondary Students with Psychosis: Reflections and Lessons Learned from a Master's Thesis.

机构信息

School of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.

School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.

出版信息

Int J Health Policy Manag. 2022 Mar 1;11(3):269-276. doi: 10.34172/ijhpm.2020.138.

DOI:10.34172/ijhpm.2020.138
PMID:32772008
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9278473/
Abstract

Engaging knowledge users (KUs) as research team members throughout the research process helps generate relevant knowledge and may improve uptake of research results. The purpose of this article is to describe how an integrated knowledge translation (iKT) approach was embedded within a master's thesis project comprising a mixed-methods systematic review. KUs were engaged in four distinct phases of the systematic review process, including (1) proposal development; (2) development of the research question and approach; (3) creation of an advisory panel; and (4) an end of study meeting to interpret findings and plan dissemination of findings. The extent of each KU's engagement on the research team fluctuated during the study. Challenges included maintaining the same KUs throughout the project and maintaining the scope of the project to align with a master's thesis. Our suggestions for optimizing graduate student iKT projects include having regular team meetings and periodically checking in with team members to encourage reflection on overall engagement and progress of the project. Overall, KUs helped create a research project designed to address their needs and provided input on how results might translate into implications for clinical practice, education, academic policy, and future research within their respective contexts.

摘要

让知识用户(KUs)作为研究团队成员全程参与研究,有助于生成相关知识,并可能提高研究成果的应用。本文旨在描述一种综合知识转化(iKT)方法如何嵌入到一个由混合方法系统评价组成的硕士论文项目中。KUs 参与了系统评价过程的四个不同阶段,包括(1)方案制定;(2)研究问题和方法的制定;(3)顾问小组的创建;以及(4)结束研究会议,以解释研究结果并计划传播研究结果。在研究过程中,每个 KU 在研究团队中的参与程度都有所波动。面临的挑战包括在整个项目中保持相同的 KU 数量,以及保持项目的范围与硕士论文一致。我们优化研究生 iKT 项目的建议包括定期召开团队会议,并定期与团队成员进行沟通,以鼓励他们对整体参与度和项目进展进行反思。总体而言,KUs 帮助创建了一个旨在满足他们需求的研究项目,并就如何将研究结果转化为对其各自背景下的临床实践、教育、学术政策和未来研究的影响提供了意见。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c77b/9278473/8364df9487f9/ijhpm-11-269-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c77b/9278473/c6f05206eebc/ijhpm-11-269-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c77b/9278473/8364df9487f9/ijhpm-11-269-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c77b/9278473/c6f05206eebc/ijhpm-11-269-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c77b/9278473/8364df9487f9/ijhpm-11-269-g002.jpg

相似文献

1
Engaging Knowledge Users with Mental Health Experience in a Mixed-Methods Systematic Review of Post-secondary Students with Psychosis: Reflections and Lessons Learned from a Master's Thesis.精神健康体验知识用户参与混合方法系统综述:来自硕士论文的反思和经验教训。
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2022 Mar 1;11(3):269-276. doi: 10.34172/ijhpm.2020.138.
2
Evaluation of an integrated knowledge translation approach used for updating the Cochrane Review of Patient Decision Aids: a pre-post mixed methods study.用于更新《Cochrane患者决策辅助工具综述》的综合知识转化方法的评估:一项前后对比的混合方法研究。
Res Involv Engagem. 2024 Feb 9;10(1):21. doi: 10.1186/s40900-024-00550-w.
3
Integrated knowledge translation guidelines for trainees in health research: an environmental scan.健康研究培训生综合知识转化指南:环境扫描
Health Res Policy Syst. 2023 Jul 14;21(1):74. doi: 10.1186/s12961-023-01024-3.
4
Variable participation of knowledge users in cancer health services research: results of a multiple case study.知识使用者在癌症卫生服务研究中的不同参与程度:一项多案例研究的结果。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018 Nov 22;18(1):150. doi: 10.1186/s12874-018-0593-8.
5
Identifying competencies for integrated knowledge translation: a Delphi study.确定综合知识转化能力:一项德尔菲研究。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2021 Oct 30;21(1):1181. doi: 10.1186/s12913-021-07107-7.
6
Engaging knowledge users in a systematic review on the comparative effectiveness of geriatrician-led models of care is possible: A cross-sectional survey using the Patient Engagement Evaluation Tool.让知识使用者参与老年病医生主导的护理模式比较效果的系统评价是可行的:使用患者参与评估工具进行的横断面调查。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2019 Sep;113:58-63. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.05.015. Epub 2019 May 23.
7
Maximizing research impacts on cancer prevention: An integrated knowledge translation approach used by the Canadian Population Attributable Risk of Cancer (ComPARe) study.最大化癌症预防研究的影响:加拿大人口归因癌症风险(ComPARe)研究采用的综合知识转化方法。
Prev Med. 2019 May;122:148-154. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2019.03.036.
8
Student and educator experiences of maternal-child simulation-based learning: a systematic review of qualitative evidence protocol.基于母婴模拟学习的学生和教育工作者体验:定性证据协议的系统评价
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Jan;13(1):14-26. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-1694.
9
"Exploring knowledge-user experiences in integrated knowledge translation: a biomedical investigation of the causes and consequences of food allergy".探索综合知识转化中的知识使用者体验:食物过敏因果关系的生物医学调查
Res Involv Engagem. 2016 Sep 1;2:27. doi: 10.1186/s40900-016-0043-x. eCollection 2016.
10
Defining the Scope of Knowledge Translation Within a National, Patient-Oriented Kidney Research Network.在一个以患者为导向的国家肾脏研究网络中界定知识转化的范围。
Can J Kidney Health Dis. 2021 Apr 8;8:20543581211004803. doi: 10.1177/20543581211004803. eCollection 2021.

引用本文的文献

1
Trainee-led research using an integrated knowledge translation or other research partnership approaches: a scoping reviews.以学员为主导的研究采用综合知识转化或其他研究伙伴关系方法:范围综述。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2021 Nov 2;19(1):135. doi: 10.1186/s12961-021-00784-0.

本文引用的文献

1
How does integrated knowledge translation (IKT) compare to other collaborative research approaches to generating and translating knowledge? Learning from experts in the field.综合知识转化(IKT)与其他协作研究方法在生成和转化知识方面有何不同?向该领域的专家学习。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2020 Mar 30;18(1):35. doi: 10.1186/s12961-020-0539-6.
2
Post-secondary students with symptoms of psychosis: A mixed-methods systematic review.有精神病症状的大专学生:一项混合方法的系统评价。
Int J Ment Health Nurs. 2020 Aug;29(4):590-607. doi: 10.1111/inm.12700. Epub 2020 Feb 10.
3
Integrated Knowledge Translation with Public Health Policy Makers: A Scoping Review.
与公共卫生政策制定者的综合知识转化:一项范围综述
Healthc Policy. 2019 Feb;14(3):55-77. doi: 10.12927/hcpol.2019.25792.
4
Getting with the times: a narrative review of the literature on group decision making in virtual environments and implications for promotions committees.与时俱进:虚拟环境中群体决策文献回顾及对晋升委员会的启示
Perspect Med Educ. 2018 Jun;7(3):147-155. doi: 10.1007/s40037-018-0434-9.
5
Moving knowledge into action for more effective practice, programmes and policy: protocol for a research programme on integrated knowledge translation.将知识转化为行动,以实现更有效的实践、项目和政策:综合知识转化研究计划方案。
Implement Sci. 2018 Feb 2;13(1):22. doi: 10.1186/s13012-017-0700-y.
6
Community-based participatory research and integrated knowledge translation: advancing the co-creation of knowledge.基于社区的参与式研究和综合知识转化:推进知识的共同创造。
Implement Sci. 2017 Dec 19;12(1):150. doi: 10.1186/s13012-017-0696-3.
7
Defining Integrated Knowledge Translation and Moving Forward: A Response to Recent Commentaries.定义整合性知识转化并向前迈进:对近期评论的回应
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2017 May 1;6(5):299-300. doi: 10.15171/ijhpm.2017.15.
8
Identifying and prioritising systematic review topics with public health stakeholders: A protocol for a modified Delphi study in Switzerland to inform future research agendas.确定和优先考虑具有公共卫生利益相关者的系统评价主题:瑞士一项改良德尔菲研究的方案,为未来的研究议程提供信息。
BMJ Open. 2017 Aug 4;7(8):e015500. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-015500.
9
Process and impact of patient involvement in a systematic review of shared decision making in primary care consultations.患者参与基层医疗会诊中共同决策系统评价的过程及影响
Health Expect. 2017 Apr;20(2):298-308. doi: 10.1111/hex.12458. Epub 2016 May 12.
10
User involvement in a Cochrane systematic review: using structured methods to enhance the clinical relevance, usefulness and usability of a systematic review update.用户参与Cochrane系统评价:运用结构化方法提升系统评价更新的临床相关性、实用性和易用性。
Syst Rev. 2015 Apr 20;4:55. doi: 10.1186/s13643-015-0023-5.