ReviewDeliberative dialogues as a mechanism for knowledge translation and exchange in health systems decision-making
Section snippets
Background
An important goal of system-level knowledge translation and exchange (KTE) is using evidence in decision-making about problems or issues affecting the health system (Canadian Health Services Research Foundation (CHSRF), 2006). KTE is broadly defined as “a dynamic and iterative process that includes the synthesis, dissemination, exchange and ethically sound application of knowledge to improve health status, provide more effective health services and products, and strengthen the healthcare
Methods
We used CIS (Dixon-Woods et al., 2006) in order to focus on the conceptual translation of quantitative and qualitative studies, as well as non-empirical papers. The question that guided our review was: What are the key features of deliberative dialogues, their intended effects and the relationships between features and effects, particularly as they help to explain their potential as a KTE strategy?
We used three strategies to identify papers. We: 1) searched the following databases from 1980 to
Results
We identified 4487 non-duplicate articles from our database search. We retrieved 71 of these for full text review (kappa = 0.75, 95% CI 0.43–1.0), as well as 8 additional papers from references and key informants. Of these 79 full-text papers, we included 17 that met our inclusion criteria (kappa = 0.39, 95% CI -0.37–1.16) and we excluded 62 for the following reasons: 60 did not meet the inclusion criteria; and, 2 papers were not available. (We considered kappa to be fair given that the codes
Model: key features and intended effects of deliberative dialogues as a KTE strategy
We devised a model based on the findings that emerged from the synthesis process. The model combines: 1) constructs related to key features; 2) constructs related to intended effects; and, 3) the synthetic construct of ‘capacity building’. Our analysis did not reveal any data about relationships between key features and intended effects. However, the concept of ‘capacity building’ seemed to underpin what we found. Thus, we considered capacity building to be a synthetic construct that helps to
Appropriate meeting environment
The literature reflected the importance of ensuring that the meeting environment is conducive to deliberation about a policy issue. Although we identified several design features important to creating a meeting that enables free-ranging discussion, many of the features identified are consistent with any meeting that aims to create an environment in which meaningful participant communication (i.e., exchanging thoughts, ideas or information) is optimized (Gregory, Hartz-Karp, & Watson, 2008; Hunt
Intended effects
Understanding what the intended effects of deliberative dialogues are is a necessary precondition of determining their effectiveness. Based on the literature we reviewed the intended effects of deliberative dialogues may occur at the individual, community/organizational or system levels, and these can be considered in the short, medium or long-term.
Synthesizing construct: capacity building
We identified ‘capacity building’ as a synthesizing construct that helps to explain the relationships between key features and intended effects of deliberative dialogues when used as a KTE strategy. Capacity building involves strengthening knowledge, abilities, skills and actions in order that an individual, organization, community or system can meet its goals.
The papers from the field of environmental policy most notably discussed capacity building. For example, Beierle (2002) points out that
Discussion
We created a model that demonstrates how deliberative dialogues can initiate a KTE process that contributes to evidence-informed health system decision-making. In addition to creating a model, several key findings emerged from our review of the literature. First, the majority of the literature we reviewed was theoretical or focussed on evaluating the procedural aspects of deliberative dialogues, which, until recently, has also been a major focus in the deliberation methods literature more
Strengths and limitations
Our study has two main strengths. First, while tools and models exist to support the development and evaluation of KTE interventions targeted at changing the behaviour of healthcare professionals (Davis et al., 2003; DiCenso et al., 2002; Dobbins, Ciliska, Estabrooks, & Hayward, 2005), we generated a model that can be used to support evidence-informed health policy decision-making. Second, despite the challenges we encountered while synthesizing empirical and non-empirical forms of evidence
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank Dr. Mary Dixon-Woods and Dr. Kate Flemming for input and advice using the critical interpretive synthesis method. The authors would also like to acknowledge the financial support of the Community Alliances for Health Research and Knowledge Translation on Pain.
References (42)
- et al.
An innovative participatory method for newly democratic societies: the "civic groups forum" on national health insurance reform in Taiwan
Social Science & Medicine
(2010) - et al.
Science in the public process of ecosystem management: lessons from Hawaii, Southeast Asia, Africa and the US Mainland
Journal of Environmental Management
(2005) - et al.
How can we synthesize qualitative and quantitative evidence for healthcare policy-makers and managers?
Healthcare Management Forum
(2006) - et al.
Translating research into policy and practice in developing countries: a case study of magnesium sulphate for pre-eclampsia
BMC Health Services Research
(2005) - et al.
Effective strategies for interactive public engagement in the development of healthcare policies and programs
(2010) The quality of stakeholder-based decisions
Risk Analysis
(2002)The role of scientific knowledge in public policy in theory and in political practice: the case of integrated rural development
Beginning with the end in mind
(2009)- et al.
Maximizing the impact of systematic reviews in health care decision making: a systematic scoping review of knowledge-translation resources
Milbank Quarterly
(2011) Democratic science: enhancing the role of science in stakeholder-based risk management decision-making
(2000)
Weighing up the evidence: Making evidence-informed guidance accurate, achievable, and acceptable
More about knowledge translation at CIHR
Knowledge exchange processes in organizations and policy arenas: a narrative systematic review of the literature
Millbank Quarterly
Four approaches to capacity building in health: consequences for measurement and accountability
Health Promotion International
Deliberative processes and evidence-informed decision-making in health care: do they work and how might we know?
Evidence & Policy
The case for knowledge translation: shortening the journey from evidence to effect
British Medical Journal
A toolkit to facilitate the implementation of clinical practice guidelines in healthcare settings
Hospital Quarterly
Conducting a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups
BMC Medical Research Methodology
Changing nursing practice in an organization
A knowledge transfer strategy for public health decision makers
Worldviews on Evidence-based Nursing
A randomized controlled trial evaluating the impact of knowledge translation and exchange strategies
Implementation Science
Cited by (144)
Opportunities for improved consideration of cultural benefits in environmental decision-Making
2024, Ecosystem ServicesRethinking ecoanxiety through environmental moral distress: an ethics reflection
2024, Journal of Climate Change and HealthA governance and coordination perspective - Sweden's and Italy's approaches to implementing One Health
2022, SSM - Qualitative Research in HealthA scoping review of theories, models and frameworks used or proposed to evaluate knowledge mobilization strategies
2024, Health Research Policy and Systems