The Fairy Godmother—and Her Warts

Weiss, Carol H.; Murphy‐Graham, Erin; Petrosino, Anthony; Gandhi, Allison Gruner

doi:10.1177/1098214007313742

Cited by 155 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 46 publications

(43 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In our experience, the information from local research efforts is highly valued for its contextual relevance, and is perhaps more likely to be put into action through health programs. For KT researchers, developing processes to assist community-based organizations to adapt research to local circumstances may be the most helpful way to advance decision making in this area [23]. Further, increasing the rigor of local research may result in building a culture supportive of evidence-informed decision making.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Community-based knowledge translation: unexplored opportunities

Kothari

Armstrong

2011

Implementation Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundKnowledge translation is an interactive process of knowledge exchange between health researchers and knowledge users. Given that the health system is broad in scope, it is important to reflect on how definitions and applications of knowledge translation might differ by setting and focus. Community-based organizations and their practitioners share common characteristics related to their setting, the evidence used in this setting, and anticipated outcomes that are not, in our experience, satisfactorily reflected in current knowledge translation approaches, frameworks, or tools.DiscussionCommunity-based organizations face a distinctive set of challenges and concerns related to engaging in the knowledge translation process, suggesting a unique perspective on knowledge translation in these settings. Specifically, community-based organizations tend to value the process of working in collaboration with multi-sector stakeholders in order to achieve an outcome. A feature of such community-based collaborations is the way in which 'evidence' is conceptualized or defined by these partners, which may in turn influence the degree to which generalizable research evidence in particular is relevant and useful when balanced against more contextually-informed knowledge, such as tacit knowledge. Related to the issues of evidence and context is the desire for local information. For knowledge translation researchers, developing processes to assist community-based organizations to adapt research findings to local circumstances may be the most helpful way to advance decision making in this area. A final characteristic shared by community-based organizations is involvement in advocacy activities, a function that has been virtually ignored in traditional knowledge translation approaches.SummaryThis commentary is intended to stimulate further discussion in the area of community-based knowledge translation. Knowledge translation, and exchange, between communities, community-based organizations, decision makers, and researchers is likely to be beneficial when ensuring that 'evidence' meets the needs of all end users and that decisions are based on both relevant research and community requirements. Further exploratory work is needed to identify alternative methods for evaluating these strategies when applied within community-based settings.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Community-based knowledge translation: unexplored opportunities

Kothari

Armstrong

2011

Implementation Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These mandates are intended to increase the use of EBP by those who receive funding. As recently as 2011, studies have demonstrated that mandating use can have a positive influence on the employment of EBP (see Rieckmann, et al 2011, and Weiss, et al, 2008 for discussion). However, the converse side of the argument demonstrates pushback from implementers about the dangers of “cookie cutter” type approaches that may develop when top-down mandates are used (Dopson, Locock, Gabbay, Ferlie, & Fitzgerald, 2003; Jette, et al, 2003; McGowan, 2010).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An overview of evidence-based program registers (EBPRs) for behavioral health

Burkhardt

Schröter

Magura

et al. 2015

Evaluation and Program Planning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evaluations of behavioral health interventions have identified many that are potentially effective. However, clinicians and other decision makers typically lack the time and ability to effectively search and synthesize the relevant research literature. In response to this opportunity, and to increasing policy and funding pressures for the use of evidence-based practices, a number of “what works” websites have emerged to assist decision makers in selecting interventions with the highest probability of benefit. However, these registers as a whole are not well understood. This article, which represents phase one of a concurrent mixed methods study, presents a review of the scopes, structures, dissemination strategies, uses, and challenges faced by evidence-based registers in the behavioral health disciplines. The major findings of this study show that in general, registers of evidence-based practices are able, to a degree, to identify the most effective practices and meet the needs of decision makers. However, much needs to be done to improve the ability of the registers to fully realize their purpose.

show abstract

“…Policy-makers operate under temporal, resource, and cognitive constraints, giving rise to a limited, or bounded, form of rationality (Cairney 2016). Crisis and controversy often preclude the luxury to fully assess the rigour of new evidence (Weiss et al 2008). Besides, evidence by itself is not enough to determine the appropriate course of action, even if it is perfectly understood (Cairney 2016).…”

Section: Conceptual Issues With Evidence-based Policy-makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Even though an incremental, or ''enlightenment,'' model is a more accurate portrayal of how evidence can and does flow into the policy process (Amara et al 2004;Head 2010;Weiss 1977), it is similarly an ineffective basis for an EBPM appeal to policymakers. Given time constraints and incentives of the electoral system (see Cairney 2016;Weiss et al 2008), policy-makers are unlikely to be particularly interested in an interpretation of EBPM that can promise only the possibility of subtle incremental benefits over the long term. If academics want the policy process to change, it is problematic that classic portrayals of EBPM's social benefits are not intuitively persuasive to the policy-maker audience that must ultimately be convinced.…”

Section: Conceptual Issues With Evidence-based Policy-makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Research–Policy Partnerships Can Benefit Government: A Win–Win for Evidence-Based Policy-Making

Richards

2017

Canadian Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quel est l'attrait de l'élaboration de politiques basée sur des données probantes pour les responsables politiques ? En quoi, pour ces responsables, le fait de subir des influences au cours du processus de prise de décisions -ce qui les conduit à prendre des décisions différentes de celles qu'ils auraient prises autrement -présente-il un attrait pour eux ? Dans cet article, l'auteur soutient que l'établissement de partenariats entre des organismes de recherche et des organisations gouvernementales offre sept avantages à court terme pour les responsables politiques, indépendamment du fait que cela peut influencer leurs décisions. Ces sept avantages possibles peuvent inciter les responsables politiques à établir des partenariats, qui peuvent ensuite, à plus long terme, se transformer en véritable outil capable ayant une influence sur l'élaboration de politiques. Cet article est donc de façon générale un plaidoyer en faveur de l'élaboration politiques basée sur des données probantes, et plus particulièrement en faveur de partenariats chercheurs/ responsables politiques, qui s'adresse à la fois aux chercheurs et aux responsables gouvernementaux.Mots clés : processus d'élaboration de politiques, élaboration de politiques basée sur des données probantes, partenariats chercheurs/responsables politiques, avantages à court terme What is the appeal of evidence-based policy-making to policy-makers themselves? What is the appeal of being influenced to make decisions they would not otherwise make? In this article, I argue that forging partnerships between research organizations and policy agencies can result in seven short-term benefits for the latter, independent of decision influence. These potential benefits are a more intuitive initial basis for partnership, and genuine influences on policy-making may still emerge over the long term. Overall, this article serves as a general argument in favour of evidence-informed policy, and research-policy partnerships in particular, directed at both academic and government audiences.

show abstract

The Fairy Godmother—and Her Warts

Cited by 155 publications

References 46 publications

Community-based knowledge translation: unexplored opportunities

Community-based knowledge translation: unexplored opportunities

An overview of evidence-based program registers (EBPRs) for behavioral health

How Research–Policy Partnerships Can Benefit Government: A Win–Win for Evidence-Based Policy-Making

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About