View in EDS

Attitudes and perceptions regarding knowledge translation and community engagement in medical research: the PERSPECT qualitative study.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Attitudes and perceptions regarding knowledge translation and community engagement in medical research: the PERSPECT qualitative study.
Authors: Drozdowska BA; Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada. bognaanna.drozdowska@ucalgary.ca., Cristall N; Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada., Fladt J; Department of Radiology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada., Jaroenngarmsamer T; Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand., Sehgal A; Department of Radiology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada., McDonough R; Department of Radiology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada., Goyal M; Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.; Department of Radiology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.; Hotchkiss Brain Institute, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada., Ganesh A; Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Source: Health research policy and systems [Health Res Policy Syst] 2025 Mar 03; Vol. 23 (1), pp. 29. Date of Electronic Publication: 2025 Mar 03.
Publication Type: Journal Article
Language: English
Journal Info: Publisher: BioMed Central Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 101170481 Publication Model: Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1478-4505 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 14784505 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Health Res Policy Syst Subsets: MEDLINE
Imprint Name(s): Original Publication: [London] : BioMed Central, 2003-
MeSH Terms: Translational Research, Biomedical* , Community Participation* , Biomedical Research* , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice*, Humans ; Qualitative Research ; Research Personnel ; Female ; Stakeholder Participation ; Male ; Patient Participation ; Interviews as Topic ; Middle Aged ; Adult ; Perception
Abstract: Competing Interests: Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: The study was approved by the University of Calgary Conjoint Health Research Ethics Board (REB21-1592). All participants provided informed consent. Consent for publication: Not applicable. Competing interests: AG reports stock options from Let’s Get Proof (Collavidence Inc.).
Background: The medical research community widely endorses the importance of ensuring that research outputs are relevant and accessible to knowledge users, as well as the value of engaging the latter in the conduct of research to achieve these goals. However, it appears these principles are reflected in actual medical research practices to a limited extent. To better understand this dissonance, we conducted a qualitative investigation into the perspectives of key stakeholders on bridging the knowledge-to-action gap and patient and public engagement.
Methods: The Priorities and Expectations of Researchers, Donors, Patients and the Public Regarding the Funding and Conduct of Medical Research (PERSPECT) qualitative study involved in-depth, semi-structured interviews with representatives of four stakeholder groups. Among other topics, participants were asked to discuss issues related to moving medical research knowledge into action (knowledge translation), including patient and public engagement during the research journey as a prerequisite to the success of this process. We analysed collected data employing an interpretative grounded theory approach. Data collection was ended once thematic saturation had been attained.
Results: A total of 41 interviews were completed and analysed (with 10 patients, 10 members of the general public, 11 researchers and 10 funders). Many participants expressed a belief in the importance of engaging patients in the research process, as well as ensuring that study findings reach beyond academic communities. However, multiple challenges and barriers were identified to implementing these values in practice, including: researchers having limited knowledge and tools to foster partnerships with community members; research outputs being inaccessible to the wider public; and the public having insufficient capacity - in view of the required time, effort and knowledge - to assimilate findings and contribute to ongoing research. Cumulatively, interviews indicated a continuing disconnect between research and lay communities, where each stakeholder group holds some responsibility for improving the current paradigm.
Conclusions: Existing gaps in communication, knowledge and relevant competencies are fuelling a disconnect between research and lay communities. Successfully moving research knowledge into action requires joint efforts of multiple stakeholder groups with support from external resources to ensure necessary training, expertise and credible dissemination platforms.
(© 2025. The Author(s).)
References: Res Involv Engagem. 2023 Mar 25;9(1):16. (PMID: 36966346)
JAMA Netw Open. 2018 Oct 5;1(6):e182969. (PMID: 30646218)
Health Expect. 2019 Aug;22(4):785-801. (PMID: 31012259)
Int J Health Serv. 2004;34(4):625-46. (PMID: 15560426)
Health Policy. 2021 Sep;125(9):1208-1221. (PMID: 34376328)
Res Involv Engagem. 2020 Jul 10;6:40. (PMID: 32676199)
BMC Med. 2020 Apr 13;18(1):79. (PMID: 32279658)
Res Involv Engagem. 2019 Feb 12;5:8. (PMID: 30805202)
Qual Life Res. 2022 Oct;31(10):2959-2968. (PMID: 35303224)
JMIR Ment Health. 2019 Apr 05;6(4):e11686. (PMID: 30950800)
Health Res Policy Syst. 2021 Jan 20;19(1):8. (PMID: 33472647)
J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2006 Winter;26(1):13-24. (PMID: 16557505)
BMJ Open. 2019 Oct 18;9(10):e028781. (PMID: 31630100)
Res Involv Engagem. 2016 Jan 14;2:1. (PMID: 29062502)
Environ Res. 2004 Jun;95(2):156-65. (PMID: 15147921)
Res Involv Engagem. 2019 Feb 20;5:10. (PMID: 30828464)
Public Health Nurs. 2006 Sep-Oct;23(5):472-8. (PMID: 16961566)
BMJ. 2002 Aug 24;325(7361):415. (PMID: 12193356)
BMJ Open. 2022 May 24;12(5):e063356. (PMID: 35613748)
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Feb 26;14:89. (PMID: 24568690)
Health Res Policy Syst. 2019 Dec 16;17(1):98. (PMID: 31842896)
J Clin Epidemiol. 2023 Aug;160:71-82. (PMID: 37356637)
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2015 Feb;10(1):3-12. (PMID: 25742661)
Prog Community Health Partnersh. 2018;12(4):473-482. (PMID: 30739901)
J Health Commun. 2011;16 Suppl 1:32-44. (PMID: 21843094)
Qual Life Res. 2018 Jan;27(1):17-31. (PMID: 28500572)
BMJ Qual Saf. 2016 Aug;25(8):626-32. (PMID: 26993640)
Med J Islam Repub Iran. 2014 Sep 17;28:98. (PMID: 25664299)
Res Involv Engagem. 2021 Jun 14;7(1):41. (PMID: 34127074)
Health Expect. 2007 Jun;10(2):173-83. (PMID: 17524010)
Res Involv Engagem. 2023 Jun 12;9(1):41. (PMID: 37308922)
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2019 Nov 21;19(1):211. (PMID: 31752691)
BMJ. 1998 Feb 7;316(7129):463-6. (PMID: 9492683)
Health Res Policy Syst. 2018 Feb 7;16(1):5. (PMID: 29415734)
Health Soc Care Community. 2005 May;13(3):268-75. (PMID: 15819748)
J Med Ethics. 2013 Mar;39(3):186-7. (PMID: 23288267)
BMJ. 2018 Nov 28;363:k4738. (PMID: 30487232)
Health Expect. 2014 Oct;17(5):637-50. (PMID: 22809132)
J Nurs Scholarsh. 2001;33(3):253-8. (PMID: 11552552)
Health Expect. 2017 Dec;20(6):1428-1436. (PMID: 28660732)
BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 Jul 25;18(1):585. (PMID: 30045726)
Contributed Indexing: Keywords: Implementation; Knowledge application; Knowledge dissemination; Knowledge translation; Patient and public engagement
Entry Date(s): Date Created: 20250303 Date Completed: 20250511 Latest Revision: 20250511
Update Code: 20250511
PubMed Central ID: PMC11874800
DOI: 10.1186/s12961-025-01306-y
PMID: 40033336
Database: MEDLINE
Description
Abstract:Competing Interests: Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: The study was approved by the University of Calgary Conjoint Health Research Ethics Board (REB21-1592). All participants provided informed consent. Consent for publication: Not applicable. Competing interests: AG reports stock options from Let’s Get Proof (Collavidence Inc.).<br />Background: The medical research community widely endorses the importance of ensuring that research outputs are relevant and accessible to knowledge users, as well as the value of engaging the latter in the conduct of research to achieve these goals. However, it appears these principles are reflected in actual medical research practices to a limited extent. To better understand this dissonance, we conducted a qualitative investigation into the perspectives of key stakeholders on bridging the knowledge-to-action gap and patient and public engagement.<br />Methods: The Priorities and Expectations of Researchers, Donors, Patients and the Public Regarding the Funding and Conduct of Medical Research (PERSPECT) qualitative study involved in-depth, semi-structured interviews with representatives of four stakeholder groups. Among other topics, participants were asked to discuss issues related to moving medical research knowledge into action (knowledge translation), including patient and public engagement during the research journey as a prerequisite to the success of this process. We analysed collected data employing an interpretative grounded theory approach. Data collection was ended once thematic saturation had been attained.<br />Results: A total of 41 interviews were completed and analysed (with 10 patients, 10 members of the general public, 11 researchers and 10 funders). Many participants expressed a belief in the importance of engaging patients in the research process, as well as ensuring that study findings reach beyond academic communities. However, multiple challenges and barriers were identified to implementing these values in practice, including: researchers having limited knowledge and tools to foster partnerships with community members; research outputs being inaccessible to the wider public; and the public having insufficient capacity - in view of the required time, effort and knowledge - to assimilate findings and contribute to ongoing research. Cumulatively, interviews indicated a continuing disconnect between research and lay communities, where each stakeholder group holds some responsibility for improving the current paradigm.<br />Conclusions: Existing gaps in communication, knowledge and relevant competencies are fuelling a disconnect between research and lay communities. Successfully moving research knowledge into action requires joint efforts of multiple stakeholder groups with support from external resources to ensure necessary training, expertise and credible dissemination platforms.<br /> (© 2025. The Author(s).)
ISSN:1478-4505
DOI:10.1186/s12961-025-01306-y