KT Traditions & Disruptions

KT Encounters is a blog and video series designed to deepen our understanding of knowledge translation (KT), the broad range of activities meant to improve the use of research evidence in practice, policy and further research. We’ve invited KT experts, including researchers, practitioners and patient representatives, to share their KT experiences and expertise to help others who do KT, do it better.

Jump to our other themes: Research Users KT 2.0

The language we use in KT can build bridges between disparate groups or it can increase the divisions between them. In this set of videos researchers and research users examine KT terminology and offer different perspectives on speaking about knowledge translation outside the university setting.

Produced by MSFHR. Filming and post-production by the Knowledge Mobilization Studio. Speaker titles and affiliations subject to change.

Speakers

Bev Holmes | VP, Research & Impact, MSFHR (Host)

Allan Best | Managing Director, InSource Research Group

Alison Hoens | Physical Therapy Knowledge Broker, University of British Columbia

Colleen McGavin | Patient Engagement Lead, BC SUPPORT Unit

Victoria Schuckel | Executive Director, Research & Innovation, British Columbia Ministry of Health

 

The big disrupters

Is the involvement of research users in research the ‘big disrupter’ needed to get evidence used?

Do we need a better term than ‘knowledge translation’ that researchers and users both relate to?

Does language need to change for patients/public to fully participate in research?

Language and context

Is it important to bring everyone to the table to develop a common language?

Who drives the conversations and language used with stakeholders — the researcher or the research user?

Should the language used depend on process, outcomes, and impacts? For example, translation versus mobilization versus implementation?

How much KT is too much?

In what ways have funders’ requirements for KT activities had positive effects on research use?

What research is not appropriate for KT?

What factors should be considered when setting expectations for researchers’ KT activities (e.g. amount of the award; type/stage of research; target audience; potential for impact)?

One word for all things?

What disciplines outside of health can help us practice/study KT?

What is the difference between knowledge translation, advocacy, social marketing and communications?

What term do you use for moving research into practice or policy and why?

Question the evidence

How important is it to align evidence with the interests, values and training of the people using it?

Do researchers need to be sensitive to users’ thoughts about research foci, questions, study design, and analysis?

How may researchers and research users benefit from a discussion about how certain types of research or evidence are valued differently than other types?

Equality at the table

What would be gained and lost if we stopped using the term KT in favour of another term developed with the public?

How do we level the playing field so research users and researchers can work together comfortably and equitably?

What tools and processes do you know about or use to help research users and researchers understand each other’s perspective?