A Transdisciplinary Approach for Teaching Implementation Research and Practice in Public Health

Abstract

The trans-disciplinary approach for teaching implementation research and practice (IR&P) in public health seeks to present related concepts on IR&P from multiple perspectives without paying an exclusive service to a specific home discipline. It is a response to the demand for a pedagogical approach to teaching that promotes a unity of knowledge around a subject that extends beyond the disciplinary boundaries within public health. Based on the experience of establishing a flagship course in IR&P at a graduate school of public health, we draw from existing theories and offer practical steps for developing and delivering content for IR&P from a trans-disciplinary perspective. The potential of this teaching approach is its ability to demonstrate the pervasiveness and easy transfer of relevant concepts in IR&P across multiple disciplines and settings. This teaching approach has relevance for influencing the overall technique to graduate level instruction in the health professions where multiple disciplines intersect.

Pilot Study: The Training of Health Professionals about Geneticalle Modified Foods from the Perspective of the Science, Technology and Society

“…The results of this work are similar with the findings of Alonge et al [18], where feasibility in teaching a module with several subtopics is stated, that is, with transfer of knowledge from several perspectives. The work of Alonge et al [18] was conducted in the USA in the format of a module for postgraduate students, using multiple approaches concerning "implementing research and practice in public health." The potential of this method is the ability to demonstrate the diffusion and transfer of knowledge from various perspectives.…”

The challenging role of researchers coping with tensions, dilemmas and paradoxes in transdisciplinary settings

“…From the researcher's side the transdisciplinary approach to teaching implementation needs to be considered (Alonge et al, 2016).…”

“…From the researcher's side the transdisciplinary approach to teaching implementation needs to be considered (Alonge et al, 2016). The authors (Alonge et al, 2016) highlight three steps (a) organising for content development (a multidisciplinary teaching team and key course content), (b) content development (framework and learning objectives as well as course content in terms of specialisation), and (c) content delivery (pedagogical methods [also see McGregor, 2017] and testing). These steps are not fully integrated and become not obvious in the phases and criteria for transdisciplinary design in Table 1.…”

Developing a framework of core competencies in implementation research for low/middle-income countries

“…Similarly, researchers must possess an understanding of the resources available and required to conduct IR in their settings, and be able to leverage those resources for the other thematic areas included in the IR process, just as skills to conduct scientific inquiry may be relevant for leveraging resources and facilitating the other thematic areas. This interconnectedness among thematic areas (represented by four rectangular blocks in figure 1) highlights the lack of a clear dichotomy between practice and research in IR,13 and the need for trainees to be proficient in knowledge and skills to do both. The systems thematic area encompasses the health systems, implementing organisations, and communities affected by implementation, and an understanding of their associated bottlenecks and barriers and how to identify facilitators for ameliorating these barriers and integrate solutions back into the systems where neccessary.…”

“…However, such competencies are not readily transportable for training programme in IR. Unlike clinical research, which may emerge outside of practice, most IR arises from practice in attempts to implement or maximise the impact of evidence-informed interventions 10 13. Leadership in clinical research also tends to be investigator-led while IR emphasises team leadership during every phase of the research and includes individuals from policy and practice 3 14–16.…”