Collaboration between researchers and knowledge users in health technology assessment: A qualitative exploratory study

International Journal of Health Policy and Management

Volumn 6, Issue 8, 2017, Pages 437-446

  Dipankui, Mylène Tantchou ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ LAVAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

Collaboration; Collective impact framework; Health technology assessment (HTA); Integrated knowledge translation; Partnership; Structuration theory

Indexed keywords

BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; COOPERATION; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HUMAN; INTERVIEW; METHODOLOGY; PERSONNEL; PROCEDURES; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCH;

COOPERATIVE BEHAVIOR; HEALTH PERSONNEL; HUMANS; INTERVIEWS AS TOPIC; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; RESEARCH DESIGN; RESEARCH PERSONNEL; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL; TRANSLATIONAL MEDICAL RESEARCH;

EID: 85029221814     PISSN: None     EISSN: 23225939     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.15171/ijhpm.2016.153     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Kothari A, Edwards N, Brajtman S, et al. Fostering interactions: the networking needs of community health nursing researchers and decision-makers. Evid Policy. 2005;1(3):291-304.
2. Hofmeyer A, Scott C, Lagendyk L. Researcher-decision-maker partnerships in health services research: practical challenges, guiding principles. BMC Health Serv Res. 2012;12:280. doi:10.1186/1472-6963-12-280
3. Lavis JN. Research, public policymaking, and knowledge-translation processes: Canadian efforts to build bridges. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2006;26(1):37-45.
4. Kothari A, MacLean L, Edwards N, Hobbs A. Indicators at the interface: managing policymaker-researcher collaboration. Knowledge Management Research & Practice. 2011;9(3):203-214. doi:10.1057/kmrp.2011.16
5. Lencucha R, Kothari A, Hamel N. Extending collaborations for knowledge translation: lessons from the community-based participatory research literature. Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice. 2010;6(1):61-75.
6. Lomas J. Using ‘linkage and exchange’ to move research into policy at a Canadian foundation. Health Aff (Millwood). 2000;19(3):236-240. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.19.3.236
7. Golden-Biddle K, Reay T, Petz S, Witt C, Casebeer A, Pablo A, Hinings CR. Toward a communicative perspective of collaborating in research: the case of the researcher decision-maker partnership. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2003;8 suppl 2:20-25.
8. Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR). Knowledge to Action: A Knowledge Translation Casebook. Ottawa: CIHR; 2008.
9. Jose K, Venn A, Jarman L, et al. Partnering Healthy@Work: an Australian university-government partnership facilitating policy-relevant research. Health Promot Int. 2016. doi:10.1093/heapro/daw033
10. Hora MT, Millar SB. A guide to building education partnerships: Navigating diverse cultural contexts to turn challenge into promise. Stylus Publishing, LLC; 2012.
11. Lasker RD, Weiss ES, Miller R. Partnership synergy: a practical framework for studying and strengthening the collaborative advantage. Milbank Q. 2001;79(2):179-205.
12. Lasker RD, Weiss ES. Creating partnership synergy: the critical role of community stakeholders. J Health Hum Serv Adm. 2003;26(1):119-139.
13. Gagliardi AR, Berta W, Kothari A, Boyko J, Urquhart R. Integrated knowledge translation (IKT) in health care: a scoping review. Implement Sci. 2016;11:38. doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0399-1
14. Weiss ES, Anderson RM, Lasker RD. Making the most of collaboration: exploring the relationship between partnership synergy and partnership functioning. Health Educ Behav. 2002;29(6):683.
15. Gagnon MP, Gagnon J, St-Pierre M, et al. Involving patients in HTA activities at local level: a study protocol based on the collaboration between researchers and knowledge users. BMC Health Serv Res. 2012;12:14. doi:10.1186/1472-6963-12-14
16. Tantchou Dipankui M, Gagnon M-P, Desmartis M, et al. La participation des patients à l’évaluation des mesures alternatives à la contention et à l’isolement. Santé Publique. 2014;26:217-226.
17. Tantchou Dipankui M, Gagnon MP, Desmartis M, et al. Evaluation of patient involvement in a health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2016; forthcoming.
18. Israel BA, Schulz AJ, Parker EA, Becker AB. Community-based participatory research: policy recommendations for promoting a partnership approach in health research. Educ Health (Abingdon). 2001;14(2):182-197.
19. Jagosh J, Macaulay AC, Pluye P, et al. Uncovering the benefits of participatory research: implications of a realist review for health research and practice. Milbank Q. 2012;90(2):311-346. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0009.2012.00665.x
20. Traynor R. Challenges of partnership research: insights from a collaborative partnership in evidence-informed public health decision-making. Evidence and Policy: A Journal of Research. 2015;11(1):99-109.
21. Huberman M. Linkage between Researchers and Practitioners: A Qualitative Study. Am Educ Res J. 1990;27(2):363-391.
22. Laycock G. From central research to local practice: Identifying and addressing repeat victimization. Public Money & Management. 2000;20(4):17-22.
23. Frenk J. Balancing relevance and excellence: Organizational responses to link research with decision-making. Soc Sci Med. 1992;35(11):1397-1404.
24. Giddens A. La constitution de la société: éléments de la théorie de la structuration. Paris: Presses universitaires de France; 1987.
25. Giddens A. The constitution of Society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1984.
26. Kania J, Kramer M. Embracing emergence: How collective impact addresses complexity. https://ssir.org/articles/entry/embracing_emergence:how_collective_impact_addresses_ complexity. January 21, 2013.
27. Vaismoradi M, Turunen H, Bondas T. Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study. Nurs Health Sci. 2013;15(3):398-405.
28. Huberman MA, Miles MB. Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks (USA): Sage Publications; 1994.
29. Miles MB, Huberman AM, Bonniol J-J. Analyse des donnèes qualitatives. 2e ed. Bruxelles: De Boeck Universitè; 2003.
30. Mulhall A. In the field: notes on observation in qualitative research. J Adv Nurs. 2003;41(3):306-313.
31. Gagnon MP, Desmartis M, Lepage-Savary D, et al. Introducing patients’ and the public’s perspectives to health technology assessment: A systematic review of international experiences. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2011;27(1):31-42.
32. Abelson J, Giacomini M, Lehoux P, Gauvin F-P. Bringing ‘the public’ into health technology assessment and coverage policy decisions: From principles to practice. Health Policy. 2007;82(1):37-50.
33. Gagnon MP, Desmartis M, Gagnon J, et al. Framework for User Involvement in Health Technology Assessment at the Local Level: Views of Health Managers, User Representatives, and Clinicians. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2015;31(1-2):68-77. doi:10.1017/S0266462315000070
34. Abelson J, Wagner F, DeJean D, et al. Public and Patient Involvement in Health Technology Assessment: A Framework for Action. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2016:1-9. doi:10.1017/S0266462316000362
35. Trostle J, Bronfman M, Langer A. How do researchers influence decision-makers? Case studies of Mexican policies. Health Policy Plan. 1999;14(2):103–114.
36. Vhonani N. Quality partnerships: The community stakeholders’ view. Gateways: International Journal of Community Research & Engagement. 2010;3:70-87. doi:10.5130/ijcre.v3i0.1541
37. Kothari A, Sibbald SL, Wathen CN. Evaluation of partnerships in a transnational family violence prevention network using an integrated knowledge translation and exchange model: a mixed methods study. Health Res Policy Syst. 2014;12:25-25. doi:10.1186/1478-4505-12-25
38. Goldman KD, Schmalz KJ. Being well-connected: starting and maintaining successful partnerships. Health Promot Pract. 2008;9(1):5. doi:10.1177/1524839907312096