Khatri Resham B, Endalamaw Aklilu, Mengistu Tesfaye, Erku Daniel, Wolka Eskinder, Nigatu Frehiwot, Zewdie Anteneh, Assefa Yibeltal
School of Public Health, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Health Social Science and Development Research Institute, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Arch Public Health. 2025 Mar 25;83(1):78. doi: 10.1186/s13690-025-01567-7.
Knowledge translation (KT) interventions encompass a variety of activities, platforms, tools, approaches, and strategies designed to leverage research evidence to enhance health policy and practice. This study aims to review and synthesize existing evidence regarding the sources of evidence for KT, platforms and tools, and their opportunities and challenges in strengthening health policy and practice.
A qualitative synthesis of the literature was conducted, adhering to scoping review guidelines. Relevant articles were identified through searches in seven databases (PubMed, Scopus, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane, PsycINFO, and Web of Science) utilizing keywords combined with Boolean operators. Additional articles were searched in Google Scholar. The search included articles published globally up to July 30, 2023, and was restricted to English-language publications. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews checklist was followed. Thematic analysis was performed, organizing emerging themes into four overarching categories: the source of evidence for KT, platforms and tools, opportunities, and challenges.
The final review included 64 articles. Several themes emerged in each category of analysis. For instance, the source of evidence for KT interventions was primarily derived from review-informed findings and tacit knowledge. KT interventions were facilitated through various platforms and tools, such as advisory committees, review and monitoring meetings, policy dialogues, frameworks, and digital tools including social media. Identified opportunities for KT included health system leadership, knowledge co-production, partnerships, organizational readiness, and evidence contextualization. Conversely, challenges included inadequate institutionalization of integrated approaches, organizational hierarchies, and fragmentation of KT efforts.
This study synthesizes insights into the sources of knowledge, KT platforms, and institutional arrangements, as well as the opportunities and challenges associated with KT interventions. The synthesized knowledge, drawn from reviews and experiential learning, can serve as a valuable resource for KT, disseminated through diverse platforms. Collaborative partnerships among evidence producers, users, and knowledge brokers, supported by appropriate frameworks, are essential for enhancing KT and improving health policy and practice.
知识转化（KT）干预措施涵盖了各种活动、平台、工具、方法和策略，旨在利用研究证据来改善卫生政策和实践。本研究旨在回顾和综合关于KT证据来源、平台和工具及其在加强卫生政策和实践方面的机遇与挑战的现有证据。
遵循范围综述指南对文献进行定性综合分析。通过使用关键词结合布尔运算符在七个数据库（PubMed、Scopus、Embase、CINAHL、Cochrane、PsycINFO和Web of Science）中进行检索，确定相关文章。在谷歌学术中搜索其他文章。检索范围包括截至2023年7月30日全球发表的文章，且仅限于英文出版物。遵循系统评价和Meta分析扩展版范围综述清单。进行主题分析，将新出现的主题归纳为四个总体类别：KT的证据来源、平台和工具、机遇和挑战。
最终综述纳入了64篇文章。每个分析类别中都出现了几个主题。例如，KT干预措施的证据来源主要来自循证结果和隐性知识。通过各种平台和工具促进KT，如咨询委员会、审查和监测会议、政策对话、框架以及包括社交媒体在内的数字工具。确定的KT机遇包括卫生系统领导力、知识共同生产、伙伴关系、组织准备情况和证据情境化。相反，挑战包括综合方法的制度化不足、组织层级以及KT工作的碎片化。
本研究综合了对知识来源、KT平台和制度安排以及与KT干预措施相关的机遇和挑战的见解。从综述和经验学习中得出的综合知识可作为KT的宝贵资源，通过各种平台传播。在适当框架的支持下，证据生产者、使用者和知识中介之间的合作伙伴关系对于加强KT以及改善卫生政策和实践至关重要。
