Advertisement

From Complex Problems to Complex Problem-Solving: Transdisciplinary Practice as Knowledge Translation

Chapter

Abstract

In this chapter, we explore how the transdisciplinary (TD) approach can advance knowledge translation (KT) related to complex inner-city health problems. KT is an emerging discourse within health and social research communities. The overriding concern in KT is to increase the use of research evidence in practical decision-making contexts. A range of conceptual frameworks have been developed to better understand effective KT processes. However, little attention has been paid to KT opportunities that may arise through TD research.

Keywords

Knowledge Translation Harm Reduction Health Equity Urban Health Communicative Intent 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge our many partners who have helped develop the ideas in this chapter. In particular we thank Jason Altenberg, Gil Gallaher, Jessica Hill, Jeff Hoch, Erika Khandor, Maritt Kirst, Pat O’Campo, Jim O’Neill, Carlos Quinonez, Lynn Raskin, Ketan Shankardass, and Anna Van Der Meulen.

References

  1. Albright, L., Cohen, A. I., Mally, T. E., Christ, T., & Bromgard, G. (2004). Judgments of communicative intent in conversation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40(3), 290–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bayoumi, A. M., Hwang, S. W., & Silversides, A. (2003). Inner city health research: A discussion paper and summary of the first International Conference on Inner City Health. Submitted to Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Institute of Population and Public Health, Ottawa: CIHR. Retrieved November 10, 2008, from http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/23948.html
  3. Canadian Institutes for Health Research (CIHR). (2007). Guidelines for health research involving Aboriginal People. Ottawa: CIHR. Retrieved August 8, 2009, from http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/29134.html
  4. Centre for Research on Inner City Health (CRICH). (2009a). The ACHIEVE research partnership. Toronto: Centre for research on Inner City Health, St. Michael’s Hospital. Retrieved August 8, 2009, from http://www.stmichaelshospital.com/crich/fellowship.php
  5. Centre for Research on Inner City Health (CRICH). (2009b). How government works workshops 2009–2010. Toronto: Centre for Research on Inner City Health, St. Michael’s Hospital. Retrieved August 8, 2009, from http://www.stmichaelshospital.com/crich/howgovworks.php
  6. Centre for Research on Inner City Health (CRICH). (2009c). Community treatment approaches for homeless adults with concurrent disorders: What works for whom, where, why, and how?: Summary of a Realist Approach to Evidence Synthesis. Toronto: Centre for Research on Inner City Health, St. Michael’s Hospital. Retrieved August 8, 2009, from http://www.stmichaelshospital.com/crich/concurrent_disorders.php
  7. Centre for Research on Inner City Health. (2009d). CRICH summary report: Survey of domiciliary hostels tenants in Ontario. Toronto: Centre for Research on Inner City Health, St. Michael’s Hospital. Retrieved August 8, 2009, from http://www.stmichaelshospital.com/crich/domiciliary_hostel_survey.php.
  8. Chalmers, I. (2005). If evidence-informed policy works in practice, does it matter if it doesn’t work in theory? Evidence and Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, 1(2), 227–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Committee on Institutional Cooperation. (2005). Engaged scholarship: A resource guide. Prepared for Committee on Institutional Cooperation Members Committee. Champagne, IL. Retrieved August 8, 2009, from http://www.cic.net/Home/Reports.aspx
  10. Community-Campus Partnerships for Health (CCPH). (2009). CCPH principles of partnership. Seattle, WA: Community-Campus Partnerships for Health. Retrieved August 8, 2009, from http://depts.washington.edu/ccph/principles.html#principles
  11. Denis, J. L., Lehoux, P., & Champagne, F. (2004). A knowledge utilization perspective. In L. Lemieux-Charles & F. Champagne (Eds.), Using knowledge and evidence in health care: Multidisciplinary perspectives (pp. 18–40). Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  12. Dewey, J. (1938/1997). Experience and education. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  13. Estabrooks, C. A., Thompson, D. S., Lovely, J. J. Hofmeyer, A. (2006). A guide to knowledge translation theory. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 26(1), 25–36.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Fafard, P. (2008). Evidence and healthy public policy: Insights from health and political sciences. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Policy Research Networks. Retrieved August 8, 2009, from http://www.cprn.org/doc.cfm?doc=1904&l=en.
  15. Fuller, S. (1998). The position: Interdisciplinarity as interpenetration.In W. H. Newel (Ed.), Interdisciplinarity: Essays from the literature. New York: College Entrance Examination Board.Google Scholar
  16. Gallaher, G., Kim, S., Kirst, M., Lofters, A., Murphy, K., O’Campo, P. et al. (2009). Measuring equity of care in hospital settings: From concepts to indicators. Toronto: Centre for Research on Inner City Health, St. Michael’s Hospital. Retrieved August 8, 2009, from http://www.stmichaelshospital.com/crich/measuring_equity.php
  17. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., & Nowotny, H. (1994). Introduction. In M. Gibbons (Ed.), The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
  18. Graham, I., Logan, J., Harrison, M. B., Straus, S. E, Tetroe, J., Caswell, W., et al. (2006). Lost in knowledge translation: Time for a map? The Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 26(1), 13–24.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Hawe, P., & Potvin, L. (2009). What is population health intervention research? Canadian Journal of Public Health, 100 (1): Special Insert.Google Scholar
  20. Institute of Population and Public Health, Population Health Intervention Research Initiative for Canada (PHIRIC). (2006). Workshop report. Retrieved November 10, 2008, from http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/33515.html#1
  21. Lomas, J. (2000). Using ‘linkage and exchange’ to move research into policy at a Canadian foundation. Health Affairs, 19(3), 236–240.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Pawson, R., & Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic evaluation. London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
  23. Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (2007). The Sage handbook of action research: Participative inquiry and practice.London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
  24. Sabatier, P., & Jenkins-Smith, H. (1999). The advocacy coalition framework: An assessment. In P. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the policy process (pp. 233–260). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  25. Tibelius, K., & Stirling, L. (2007). Research capacity development and knowledge translation at CIHR. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association of Faculties of Medicine of Canada.Google Scholar
  26. Wallerstein, N., & Duran, B. (2003). The conceptual, historical and practical roots of community based participatory research and related participatory traditions. In M. Minkler & N. Wallerstein (Eds.), Community based participatory research for health (pp. 27–52). San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.Google Scholar
  27. Weber, M. (1946). Science as a vocation. In H. H. Gerth & C. W. Mills, (Eds.), Max Weber: Essays in sociology (pp. 129–156). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Weisbuch, R. (2005). The responsive Ph.D.: Innovations in U.S. doctoral education. Princeton, NJ. The Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation. Retrieved November 10, 2008, from http://www.woodrow.org/news/other.php#innovations.
  29. Weiss, C. H. (1979). The many meanings of research utilization. Public Administration Review, 39(5), 426–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Research on Inner City HealthSt. Michael’s HospitalTorontoCanada
  2. 2.Centre for Research on Inner City HealthSt. Michael’s HospitalTorontoCanada
  3. 3.Ministry of Community and Social ServicesTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations