A scoping review of full-spectrum knowledge translation theories, models, and frameworks

Rosmin Esmail,Sage Brown,Daniel J Niven,Heather M Hanson,Lisa Strifler,Jayna Holroyd-Leduc,Sharon E Straus,Fiona M Clement

doi:10.1186/s13012-020-0964-5

Abstract

BackgroundApplication of knowledge translation (KT) theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs) is one method for successfully incorporating evidence into clinical care. However, there are multiple KT TMFs and little guidance on which to select. This study sought to identify and describe available full-spectrum KT TMFs to subsequently guide users.MethodsA scoping review was completed. Articles were identified through searches within electronic databases, previous reviews, grey literature, and consultation with KT experts. Search terms included combinations of KT terms and theory-related terms. Included citations had to describe full-spectrum KT TMFs that had been applied or tested. Titles/abstracts and full-text articles were screened independently by two investigators. Each KT TMF was described by its characteristics including name, context, key components, how it was used, primary target audience, levels of use, and study outcomes. Each KT TMF was also categorized into theoretical approaches as process models, determinant frameworks, classic theories, implementation theories, and evaluation frameworks. Within each category, KT TMFs were compared and contrasted to identify similarities and unique characteristics.ResultsElectronic searches yielded 7160 citations. Additional citations were identified from previous reviews (n = 41) and bibliographies of included full-text articles (n = 6). Thirty-six citations describing 36 full-spectrum were identified. In 24 KT TMFs, the primary target audience was multi-level including patients/public, professionals, organizational, and financial/regulatory. The majority of the KT TMFs were used within public health, followed by research (organizational, translation, health), or in multiple contexts. Twenty-six could be used at the individual, organization, or policy levels, five at the individual/organization levels, three at the individual level only, and two at the organizational/policy level. Categorization of the KT TMFs resulted in 18 process models, eight classic theories, three determinant frameworks, three evaluation frameworks, and four that fit more than one category. There were no KT TMFs that fit the implementation theory category. Within each category, similarities and unique characteristics emerged through comparison.ConclusionsA systematic compilation of existing full-spectrum KT TMFs, categorization into different approaches, and comparison has been provided in a user-friendly way. This list provides options for users to select from when designing KT projects and interventions.Trial registrationA protocol outlining the methodology of this scoping review was developed and registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018088564).

Highlights

Application of knowledge translation (KT) theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs) is one method for successfully incorporating evidence into clinical care
The 26 full-spectrum KT TMFs from the Strifler scoping review were assessed for inclusion within this review
Key findings Three key findings emerged from this scoping review: an up-to-date compilation of full-spectrum KT TMFs using scoping review methodology; categorization of these KT TMFs based on five categories of approaches; a detailed description of each KT TMF; and comparison within each category to assist with their selection for a KT project or intervention

Summary

Introduction

Application of knowledge translation (KT) theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs) is one method for successfully incorporating evidence into clinical care. In the literature and among different jurisdictions, KT has been used inter-changeably with terms such as research utilization, knowledge transfer and uptake, knowledge utilization and exchange, and implementation science (IS). IS is defined as “the scientific study of methods to promote the systematic uptake of research findings and other evidence-based practices into routine practice to improve the quality and effectiveness of health services and care” [8]. As with the previously published scoping review by Strifler et al, KT has been considered broadly to include implementation practice (implementing research evidence into practice) and implementation science (study of methods to promote uptake of research findings into practice) [9]. For the practitioner, the use of these KT TMFs requires consideration of their purpose and context

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion