Abstract

BackgroundViolence against women (VAW) is a major public health problem. Translation of VAW research to policy and practice is an area that remains understudied, but provides the opportunity to examine knowledge translation and exchange (KTE) processes in a complex, multi-stakeholder context. In a series of studies including two randomized trials, the McMaster University VAW Research Program studied one key research gap: evidence about the effectiveness of screening women for exposure to intimate partner violence. This project developed and evaluated KTE strategies to share research findings with policymakers, health and community service providers, and women's advocates.MethodsA longitudinal cross-sectional design, applying concurrent mixed data collection methods (surveys, interviews, and focus groups), was used to evaluate the utility of specific KTE strategies, including a series of workshops and a day-long Family Violence Knowledge Exchange Forum, on research sharing, uptake, and use.ResultsParticipants valued the opportunity to meet with researchers, provide feedback on key messages, and make personal connections with other stakeholders. A number of factors specific to the knowledge itself, stakeholders' contexts, and the nature of the knowledge gap being addressed influenced the uptake, sharing, and use of the research. The types of knowledge use changed across time, and were specifically related to both the types of decisions being made, and to stage of decision making; most reported use was conceptual or symbolic, with few examples of instrumental use. Participants did report actively sharing the research findings with their own networks. Further examination of these second-order knowledge-sharing processes is required, including development of appropriate methods and measures for its assessment. Some participants reported that they would not use the research evidence in their decision making when it contradicted professional experiences, while others used it to support apparently contradictory positions. The online wiki-based 'community of interest' requested by participants was not used.ConclusionsMobilizing knowledge in the area of VAW practice and policy is complex and resource-intensive, and must acknowledge and respect the values of identified knowledge users, while balancing the objectivity of the research and researchers. This paper provides important lessons learned about these processes, including attending to the potential unintended consequences of knowledge sharing.

Highlights

  • Violence against women (VAW) is a major public health problem

  • The research program had as its primary goal answering the question: does routine screening for intimate partner violence against women presenting to healthcare settings reduce violence and improve life quality for women? The program was conducted in three phases (Figure 1), with multiple qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods projects designed to answer specific questions that required evidence in order to develop the main study, a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of the effectiveness of screening including 18 months of follow-up

  • We report on the four-year study that identified and documented how stakeholders received, engaged with, and used the research knowledge shared with them via a series of knowledge translation and exchange (KTE) strategies

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Violence against women (VAW) is a major public health problem. Translation of VAW research to policy and practice is an area that remains understudied, but provides the opportunity to examine knowledge translation and exchange (KTE) processes in a complex, multi-stakeholder context. Data on the prevalence [1,2,3], consequences [4,5,6,7], and costs [8,9] of intimate partner violence (IPV) against women attest to its persistent and devastating impact on the lives of women, their children, and society It has been almost 20 years since IPV was declared to be a major public health problem [10], yet many gaps remain regarding effective approaches to detecting and responding to it [11,12,13,14], which have led to debates and conflicting advice to health and social service providers and policy decision makers [15]. In 2008, we received new funding for additional KTE activities focussed on the results of the screening effectiveness trial that were published in 2009 [16]

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call