BackgroundThere has been widespread acknowledgement of the need to build capacity in knowledge translation however much of the existing work focuses on building capacity amongst researchers rather than with clinicians directly. This paper’s aim is to describe a research project for developing a knowledge translation capacity building program for occupational therapy clinicians.MethodsParticipatory action research methods were used to both develop and evaluate the knowledge translation capacity-building program. Participants were occupational therapists from a large metropolitan hospital in Australia. Researchers and clinicians worked together to use the action cycle of the Knowledge to Action Framework to increase use of knowledge translation itself within the department in general, within their clinical teams, and to facilitate knowledge translation becoming part of the department’s culture. Barriers and enablers to using knowledge translation were identified through a survey based on the Theoretical Domains Framework and through focus groups. Multiple interventions were used to develop a knowledge translation capacity-building program.ResultsFifty-two occupational therapists participated initially, but only 20 across the first 18 months of the project. Barriers and enablers were identified across all domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework. Interventions selected to address these barriers or facilitate enablers were categorised into ten different categories: educational outreach; teams working on clinical knowledge translation case studies; identifying time blocks for knowledge translation; mentoring; leadership strategies; communication strategies; documentation and resources to support knowledge translation; funding a knowledge translation champion one day per week; setting goals for knowledge translation; and knowledge translation reporting strategies. Use of these strategies was, and continues to be monitored. Participants continue to be actively involved in learning and shaping the knowledge translation program across the department and within their specific clinical areas.ConclusionTo build capacity for knowledge translation, it is important to involve clinicians. The action cycle of the Knowledge to Action framework is a useful guide to introduce the knowledge translation process to clinicians. It may be used to engage the department as a whole, and facilitate the learning and application of knowledge translation within specific clinical areas. Research evaluating this knowledge translation program is being conducted.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12909-016-0771-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Chemotherapy-related cognitive impairment (CRCI) can occur during or after chemotherapy and represents a concern for many patients with cancer. Among older patients with cancer, in whom there is little clinical trial evidence examining side effects like CRCI, many unanswered questions remain regarding risk for and resulting adverse outcomes from CRCI. Given the rising incidence of cancer with age, CRCI is of particular concern for older patients with cancer who receive treatment. Therefore, research related to CRCI in older patients with cancers is a high priority. In this manuscript, we discuss current gaps in research highlighting the lack of clinical studies of CRCI in older adults, the complex mechanisms of CRCI, and the challenges in measuring cognitive impairment in older patients with cancer. Although we focus on CRCI, we also discuss cognitive impairment related to cancer itself and other treatment modalities. We highlight several research priorities to improve the study of CRCI in older patients with cancer.

The KT capacity-building intervention changed one clinician-reported behaviour and perceived impact of barriers across six domains. Clinicians reported perceived improvement in understanding of - and confidence in - KT, and changes in the culture to one of engaging with KT as part of clinical practice. Further research into KT capacity building is needed.

Organisational initiatives for evidence-based practice were perceived as influencing the culture of the workplace, therapists' sense of identity as clinicians, and as contributing to changes in clinical practice. It is therefore important to consider organisational factors when attempting to increase the use of evidence in practice.

Background Older patients with advanced cancer who are 100% certain they will be cured pose unique challenges for clinical decision making, but to the authors’ knowledge, the prevalence and correlates of absolute certainty about curability (ACC) are unknown. Methods Cross‐sectional data were collected in a geriatric assessment trial. ACC was assessed by asking patients, “What do you believe are the chances that your cancer will go away and never come back with treatment?” Response options were 100% (coded as ACC), >50%, 50/50, <50%, 0%, and uncertain. The willingness to bear adversity in exchange for longevity was assessed by asking patients to consider trade‐offs between survival and 2 clinical outcomes that varied in abstractness: 1) maintaining quality of life (QOL; an abstract outcome); and 2) specific treatment‐related toxicities (eg, nausea/vomiting, worsening memory). Logistic regression was used to assess the independent associations between willingness to bear adversity and ACC. Results Of the 524 patients aged 70 to 96 years, approximately 5.3% reported that there was a 100% chance that their cancer would be cured (ACC). ACC was not found to be significantly associated with willingness to bear treatment‐related toxicities, but was more common among patients who were willing to trade QOL for survival (adjusted odds ratio, 4.08; 95% CI, 1.17‐14.26). Conclusions Patients who were more willing to bear adversity in the form of an abstract state, namely decreased QOL, were more likely to demonstrate ACC. Although conversations regarding prognosis should be conducted with all patients, those who are willing to trade QOL for survival may especially benefit from conversations that focus on values and emotions.