Understanding user context in knowledge translation

Jacobson, N., Butterill, D., & Goering, P. (2003). Development of a framework for knowledge translation: Understanding user context. Journal of Health Services Research, 8(2), 94-99.

Description

This method is useful for planning the dissemination of information or evidence tailored to relevant user groups. The method includes five domains, with questions within each domain, to become more familiar with user groups. The questions provide a way to organize information about the intended users of evidence and knowledge translation activities, and also to identify missing information.

This method is based on interactive models of knowledge translation. In these models, knowledge translation is facilitated when evidence users and producers have a relationship and understand one another's needs, preferences and circumstances.

Knowledge use can be thought of as a process, rather than as a product or outcome (Landry, Amara & Lamari, 2001). The six stages of knowledge use include:

  • Transmission: dissemination of evidence to the user group
  • Cognition: the user group attends to and understands the research
  • Reference: evidence is cited as a reference by the user group in reports and strategies of action
  • Effort: the user group attempts to adopt research findings
  • Influence: the research findings influence the user group's decisions
  • Application: research is applied and extended by practitioners within the user group

The method includes five domains:

  1. the user group
  2. the issue
  3. the research
  4. the producer-user relationship
  5. dissemination strategies

Steps for Using Method/Tool

The method includes five domains that move from general to specific questions about the user group. These questions aim to increase understanding of the user group's needs and context.

1. The user group:

The following questions consider the context in which the user group operates.

  • In what formal or informal structures is the user group embedded?
  • What is the political climate surrounding the user group?
  • To whom is the user group accountable?
  • Are changes expected in any of these?

The characteristics of the user group influence how information is shared and used by the user group, and who may be at risk due to the changes because of power dynamics.

  • How big is the user group?
  • How centralized is the user group?
  • How institutionalized is the user group?
  • What are the politics within the user group?

How the user group makes decisions will have an impact on any knowledge translation activities.

  • What kinds of decisions does the user group make?
  • What is the user group's attitude toward decision making?
  • What criteria are used to make decisions?
  • What actions are available to the user group?
  • What are the stages or phases of the user group's decision-making work?
  • What is the pace of work?

Understanding the reasons why the user group uses evidence will inform any knowledge translation activities and will help provide information in forms that are more accessible and useful for the user group.

  • What sources of information does the user group access and use?
  • How does the user group access, disseminate and apply information internally?
  • For what purposes does the user group use information?
  • Has the user group demonstrated an ability to learn?
  • What incentives exist for the user group to use evidence?
  • Is the user group cynical about research?
  • How sophisticated is the user group's knowledge of research methods and terminology?

The user group's prior experience with knowledge translation activities and expectations of the process and outcomes of knowledge translation activities are also important to consider.

  • Does the user group have a history of being involved in knowledge translation?
  • What knowledge translation structures and processes already exist?
  • What resources does the user group devote to knowledge translation?
  • What are the user group's expectations of the researcher? Of the knowledge translation process?
  • How many user group members will be involved in the knowledge translation process? Who are they?

2. The issue

Characteristics of the issue will influence the user group's willingness to use evidence to address the issue.

  • To which policy sector(s) does this issue relate?
  • For which other groups is the issue salient?
  • How does the user group currently deal with this issue?
  • Are things changing with the issue? How quickly are those changes taking place?
  • How much uncertainty surrounds the issue?
  • How much conflict surrounds the issue?
  • What risks are associated with the issue?
  • Is it necessary to have a particular expertise in order to understand this issue?

3. The research
In general, most user groups prefer research that is broad, provides answers, and is action-oriented. User groups may use research that is ambiguous or has gaps for political rather than instrumental purposes.

  • What research is available?
  • Is the research unambiguous?
  • Is the research consistent?
  • What is the quality of the research?
  • How methodologically strong is the research?
  • What is the source of the research?
  • Is the research very focused and fragmented or quite broad and synthetic in focus?
  • Does the research suggest an immediate application? Is it action-oriented?

User groups are more likely to use research that they perceive as relevant to their current priorities, and that is congruent with their values and ideologies.

  • How relevant is the research to the user group?
  • Does the research have implications that are incompatible with existing user group expectations or priorities?
  • Would these implications disrupt the user group's status quo?
  • Do these implications suggest changes that the user group believes are politically feasible?

4. The producer-user relationship
Considering the relationship between the producer and user of research is another domain relevant for knowledge translation. Building relationships in producing evidence, especially through early engagement, facilitates knowledge translation activities.

  • How much trust and rapport exist between the researcher and the user group?
  • Do the researcher and the user group have a history of working together?
  • Is the user group stable or is it likely to undergo changes that will affect knowledge translation?
  • Will the researcher be interacting with a designated representative of the user group? Will that representative remain the same throughout the life of the project?
  • How frequently will the researcher have contact with the user group?
  • Have the researcher and the user group agreed about the desired outcomes of knowledge translation?
  • Have the reseracher and the user group agreed about the responsiblities each will have during knowledge translation?

5. Dissemination strategies

This set of questions provides practical suggestions for disseminating evidence, drawing from the developer's experience.

  • Should the user group go to the producer or vice versa?
  • What is the most appropriate mode of interaction: written or oral, formal or informal?
  • If using a written mode, what format is most appropriate to the user group? What are the group's preferences regarding length?
  • If using an oral mode, what format is most appropriate to the user group? What are the group's preferences and constraints (e.g., time commitment)?
  • What level of detail will the user group want to see?
  • Can the research be made vivid to the user group through case examples or other strategies?
  • What is the optimum conceptual size for presentation of research to this user group?
  • How much information can the user group assimilate per interaction?
  • Should the researcher pre-test or invite feedback on the selected format from representatives of the user group before finalizing presentation plans?
  • To what extent, and in what ways, should the researcher continue to be available to the user group after the conclusion of translating the knowledge?

These summaries are written by the NCCMT to condense and to provide an overview of the resources listed in the Registry of Methods and Tools and to give suggestions for their use in a public health context. For more information on individual methods and tools included in the review, please consult the authors/developers of the original resources.

We have provided the resources and links as a convenience and for informational purposes only; they do not constitute an endorsement or an approval by McMaster University of any of the products, services or opinions of the external organizations, nor have the external organizations endorsed their resources and links as provided by McMaster University. McMaster University bears no responsibility for the accuracy, legality or content of the external sites.

Have you used this resource? Share your story!