Skip to main content
Log in

Knowledge translation strategies designed for public health decision-making settings: a scoping review

  • Original article
  • Published:
International Journal of Public Health

Abstract

Objectives

To review and describe available Knowledge Translation (KT) strategies that are designed for or applied in public health decision-making settings.

Introduction

KT is the exchange, synthesis, and ethically sound application of knowledge. This review proposes that KT strategies in public health settings should be understood as action plans that promote evidence use and facilitate evidence-informed decision-making.

Methods

This scoping review included studies that reported on KT strategies applied in public health settings, published between 2010 and 2017. Studies were searched using Medline, online KT database, and citation tracing. Data from 305 included studies were synthesized using a coding form and conceptually mapped to identify KT strategies used in public health settings.

Results

A total of 124 unique examples of KT methods or tools were identified and summarized into 38 recommended and promising KT strategies. Built on the lists of recommended strategies, this review synthesized a framework that matched all 38 KT strategies to 10 key components of the evidence-informed decision-making process.

Conclusions

The public health KT strategies summarized and organized by this review promote a better understanding and more effective use of KT strategies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Armstrong R, Waters E, Dobbins M, Lavis JN, Petticrew M, Christensen R (2011) Knowledge translation strategies for facilitating evidence‐informed public health decision making among managers and policy‐makers. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

  • Babbie ER (1998) The practice of social research, vol 112. Wadsworth Publishing Company, Belmont

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey J, Mann S, Wayal S, Hunter R, Free C, Abraham C, Murray E (2015) Scoping review methodology. In: Sexual health promotion for young people delivered via digital media: a scoping review. NIHR Journals Library

  • Bowen S, Zwi AB (2005) Pathways to “evidence-informed” policy and practice: a framework for action. PLoS Med 2:e166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cihr C (2004) Knowledge translation strategy 2004–2009: innovation in action. Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Ottawa

    Google Scholar 

  • Ciliska D, Thomas H, Buffett C (2008a) A compendium of critical appraisal tools for public health practice links

  • Ciliska D, Thomas H, Buffett C (2008b) An introduction to evidence-informed public health and a compendium of critical appraisal tools for public health practice. National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools, Ontario

  • Colquhoun H, Leeman J, Michie S et al (2014) Towards a common terminology: a simplified framework of interventions to promote and integrate evidence into health practices, systems, and policies. Implement Sci 9:781

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooke A, Smith D, Booth A (2012) Beyond PICO: the SPIDER tool for qualitative evidence synthesis. Qual Health Res 22:1435–1443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis D, Davis ME, Jadad A et al (2003) The case for knowledge translation: shortening the journey from evidence to effect. BMJ 327:33–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dixon-Woods M, Cavers D, Agarwal S et al (2006) Conducting a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups. BMC Med Res Methodol 6:1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Field B, Booth A, Ilott I, Gerrish K (2014) Using the knowledge to action framework in practice: a citation analysis and systematic review. Implement Sci 9:172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glasgow RE, Lichtenstein E, Marcus AC (2003) Why don’t we see more translation of health promotion research to practice? Rethinking the efficacy-to-effectiveness transition. Am J Public Health 93:1261–1267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Golafshani N (2003) Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. Qual Rep 8:597–606

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham ID, Logan J, Harrison MB, Straus SE, Tetroe J, Caswell W, Robinson N (2006) Lost in knowledge translation: time for a map? J Contin Educ Health Prof 26:13–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grol R, Grimshaw J (2003) From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients’ care. Lancet 362:1225–1230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grol R, Jones R (2000) Twenty years of implementation research. Fam Pract 17:S32–S35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs JA, Jones E, Gabella BA, Spring B, Brownson RC (2012) Peer reviewed: tools for implementing an evidence-based approach in public health practice. Preventing chronic disease 9

  • Jacobson N, Butterill D, Goering P (2003) Development of a framework for knowledge translation: understanding user context. J Health Serv Res Policy 8:94–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LaRocca R, Yost J, Dobbins M, Ciliska D, Butt M (2012) The effectiveness of knowledge translation strategies used in public health: a systematic review. BMC Public Health 12:751. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-12-751

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Malla C, Aylward P, Ward P (2018) Knowledge translation for public health in low-and middle-income countries: a critical interpretive synthesis. Glob Health Res Policy 3:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKibbon KA, Lokker C, Wilczynski NL et al (2010) A cross-sectional study of the number and frequency of terms used to refer to knowledge translation in a body of health literature in 2006: a Tower of Babel? Implement Sci 5:16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKibbon KA, Lokker C, Keepanasseril A, Colquhoun H, Haynes RB, Wilczynski NL (2013) WhatisKT wiki: a case study of a platform for knowledge translation terms and definitions—descriptive analysis Implementation. Science 8:13

    Google Scholar 

  • Methley AM, Campbell S, Chew-Graham C, McNally R, Cheraghi-Sohi S (2014) PICO, PICOS and SPIDER: a comparison study of specificity and sensitivity in three search tools for qualitative systematic reviews. BMC Health Serv Res 14:579

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munn Z, Peters MD, Stern C, Tufanaru C, McArthur A, Aromataris E (2018) Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Med Res Methodol 18:143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nutbeam D (1986) Health promotion glossary. Health Promot Int 1(1):113–127

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers JD, Martin FH, Force NKTT (2009) Knowledge translation in disability and rehabilitation research: lessons from the application of knowledge value mapping to the case of accessible currency. J Disabil Policy Stud 20:110–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rychetnik L, Hawe P, Waters E, et al (2004) A glossary for evidence based public health. J Epidemiol Community Health 58:538–545

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith BJ, Tang KC, Nutbeam D (2006) WHO health promotion glossary: new terms. Health Promot Int 21:340–345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strifler L, Cardoso R, McGowan J et al (2018) Scoping review identifies significant number of knowledge translation theories, models, and frameworks with limited use. J Clin Epidemiol 100:92–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W et al (2018) PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Internal Med 169:467–473

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Zhuxuan Fu and Jian Shi for serving as second screener for some of the articles.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

N.Z., S.K.W., A.L., and M.C. contributed to study concept and design. N.Z. finalized the search strategy and completed data acquisition and cleaning. N.Z. and M.C. interpreted the data. N.Z. drafted the manuscript. S.K.W., A.L., and M.C. provided valuable input and revised the manuscript. M.C. provided funding for research assistants’ time. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mei Chung.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

None.

Financial support

This work was completed as part of N.Z.’s DrPH dissertation, which received stipend support from the Department of Public Health and Community Medicine, at Tufts University School of Medicine.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the section “Knowledge synthesis, translation and exchange.”

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 471 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhao, N., Koch-Weser, S., Lischko, A. et al. Knowledge translation strategies designed for public health decision-making settings: a scoping review. Int J Public Health 65, 1571–1580 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00038-020-01506-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00038-020-01506-z

Keywords

Navigation