Indicators to evaluate organisational knowledge brokers: a scoping review

Abstract

Background: Knowledge translation (KT) is currently endorsed by global health policy actors as a means to improve outcomes by institutionalising evidence-informed policy-making. Organisational knowledge brokers, comprised of researchers, policy-makers and other stakeholders, are increasingly being used to undertake and promote KT at all levels of health policy-making, though few resources exist to guide the evaluation of these efforts. Using a scoping review methodology, we identified, synthesised and assessed indicators that have been used to evaluate KT infrastructure and capacity-building activities in a health policy context in order to inform the evaluation of organisational knowledge brokers. Methods: A scoping review methodology was used. This included the search of Medline, Global Health and the WHO Library databases for studies regarding the evaluation of KT infrastructure and capacity-building activities between health research and policy, published in English from 2005 to 2016. Data on study characteristics, outputs and outcomes measured, related indicators, mode of verification, duration and/or frequency of collection, indicator methods, KT model, and targeted capacity level were extracted and charted for analysis. Results: A total of 1073 unique articles were obtained and 176 articles were qualified to be screened in full-text; 32 articles were included in the analysis. Of a total 213 indicators extracted, we identified 174 (174/213; 81.7%) indicators to evaluate the KT infrastructure and capacity-building that have been developed using methods beyond expert opinion. Four validated instruments were identified. The 174 indicators are presented in 8 domains based on an adaptation of the domains of the Lavis et al. framework of linking research to actiongeneral climate, production of research, push efforts, pull efforts, exchange efforts, integrated efforts, evaluation and capacitybuilding. Conclusion: This review presents a total of 174 method-based indicators to evaluate KT infrastructure and capacitybuilding. The presented indicators can be used or adapted globally by organisational knowledge brokers and other stakeholders in their monitoring and evaluation work.

Can co-created knowledge mobilisation interventions alter and enhance mindlines to improve childhood eczema care? A UK-based Social Impact Framework evaluation

“…Knowledge brokers as intermediaries between researchers and practitioners are well established in healthcare as evidenced in recent reviews. 49 50 Nevertheless, the role can be problematic with some brokers challenged by role ambiguity and the need for a multidimensional skill set. 51 In the present study, the broker being a researcher and nurse and having lived experience of eczema minimised these tensions and were of distinct benefit in the relationship brokering component of the role.…”

“…Knowledge brokers as intermediaries between researchers and practitioners are well established in healthcare as evidenced in recent reviews 49 50. Nevertheless, the role can be problematic with some brokers challenged by role ambiguity and the need for a multidimensional skill set 51.…”

The Role of Law Enforcement Officers/Police in Drug Prevention within Educational Settings—Study Protocol for the Development of a Guiding Document Based on Experts’ Opinions

“…Furthermore, we have used two reviewers and consulted with experts for the sake of the development of this study protocol. However, this approach has been used by other stakeholders in the field [ 31 , 32 ] and was carefully developed to be robust and feasible for our study protocol, given the available resources prior to the meeting of the experts.…”

A comprehensive monitoring and evaluation framework for evidence to policy networks

“…For the second phase of the process, two scoping reviews were undertaken to inform the development of a comprehensive set of evidence-based indicators and further enhance the framework. One was on country-level/KTP indicators (the detailed methodology is published elsewhere, see ( Scarlett, Forsberg, Biermann, Kuchenmüller, & El-Khatib, 2020 )) and the other on indicators related to the work of the Network Secretariat (see Appendix A for the methods and results). The scoping reviews relied on comprehensive search strategies applied in the following electronic databases (Medline, Global Health, and the WHO Library Database) and the grey literature (OpenGrey, DART-Europe and website searching).…”

“…In line with its focus on M&E, EVIPNet Europe also encourages critical evaluative thinking ( WHO Regional Office for Europe, 2016b ) and sharing of lessons learnt among network members ( Scarlett et al, 2018 ; WHO Regional Office for Europe, 2019 ). Through its M&E work, EVIPNet Europe aims to ( WHO Regional Office for Europe, 2015 ): ensure transparency and accountability of its activities; measure progress, effectiveness and efficiency of its strategy and activity implementation; facilitate the identification of implementation challenges and improve operations; enable network-wide knowledge sharing and learning; and contribute to KT research by creating evidence about which strategies are effective to inform future work and scaling-up.…”