Implementing health research through academic and clinical partnerships : a realistic evaluation of the Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC)

Background: The English National Health Service has made a major investment in nine partnerships between higher education institutions and local health services called Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC). They have been funded to increase capacity and capability to produce and implement research through sustained interactions between academics and health services. CLAHRCs provide a natural ‘test bed’ for exploring questions about research implementation within a partnership model of delivery. This protocol describes an externally funded evaluation that focuses on implementation mechanisms and processes within three CLAHRCs. It seeks to uncover what works, for whom, how, and in what circumstances. Design and methods: This study is a longitudinal three-phase, multi-method realistic evaluation, which deliberately aims to explore the boundaries around knowledge use in context. The evaluation funder wishes to see it conducted for the process of learning, not for judging performance. The study is underpinned by a conceptual framework that combines the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services and Knowledge to Action frameworks to reflect the complexities of implementation. Three participating CLARHCS will provide indepth comparative case studies of research implementation using multiple data collection methods including interviews, observation, documents, and publicly available data to test and refine hypotheses over four rounds of data collection. We will test the wider applicability of emerging findings with a wider community using an interpretative forum. Discussion: The idea that collaboration between academics and services might lead to more applicable health research that is actually used in practice is theoretically and intuitively appealing; however the evidence for it is limited. Our evaluation is designed to capture the processes and impacts of collaborative approaches for implementing research, and therefore should contribute to the evidence base about an increasingly popular (e.g., Mode two, integrated knowledge transfer, interactive research), but poorly understood approach to knowledge translation. Additionally we hope to develop approaches for evaluating implementation processes and impacts particularly with respect to integrated stakeholder involvement

Mastery, perceived stress and health-related behaviour in northeast Arnhem Land: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND: Indigenous peoples in Australia are disadvantaged on all markers of health and social status across the life course. Psychosocial factors are implicated in the aetiology of chronic diseases and in pathways underpinning social health disparities. Minimal research has investigated psychosocial factors and health in Indigenous peoples. This study evaluated associations between mastery, perceived stress, and health-related behaviour for a remote Indigenous population in Australia. METHODS: Complete data on mastery (the degree to which individuals feel in control of their lives), perceived stress, physical activity, and fruit and vegetable consumption were obtained for 177 participants in a community-based chronic disease risk factor survey. Psychosocial questionnaires were completed as an option during community screening (response rate = 61.9%). Extensive consultation facilitated the cross-cultural adaptation of measures. RESULTS: Mastery was inversely correlated with perceived stress measures (p < 0.009): recent stress, r = -0.47; chronic stress, r = -0.41; and youth stress, r = -0.30. Relationships between mastery and behaviour varied according to age group (<25 or ≥25 years) for physical activity (p = 0.001) and vegetable consumption (p = 0.005). Individuals aged ≥25 years engaging in ≤2 bouts of physical activity/week had lower mastery than individuals engaging in ≥3 bouts/week, with means (95% CI) of 14.8 (13.7–15.8) and 17.1 (15.3–19.0), respectively (p = 0.026). Individuals aged ≥25 years eating vegetables ≤3 times/week had lower mastery than those eating vegetables ≥4 times/week (p = 0.009) [means 14.7 (13.8–15.5) and 17.3 (15.5–19.1), respectively]. Individuals <25 years engaging in ≤2 bouts of physical activity/week had greater mastery than individuals engaging in ≥3 bouts/week (p = 0.022) [means 17.2 (15.2–19.2) and 13.8 (11.9–15.7), respectively]. For men ≥25 years and women ≥15 years, mastery was inversely related to age (p < 0.002). Men <25 years had less mastery than women of equivalent age (p = 0.001) [means 13.4 (12.1–14.7) and 17.5 (15.3–19.8), respectively]. CONCLUSION: Consistent with previous research, this study provides additional support for a link between mastery and health-related behaviour, and extends evidence of this association to a remote Indigenous population. Mastery's association with perceived stress, its age-specific association with health behaviour, and findings of low mastery amongst young men, highlights a need for life course research accounting for contextual factors affecting Indigenous peoples

Knowledge translation within a population health study: how do you do it?

BACKGROUND Despite the considerable and growing body of knowledge translation (KT) literature, there are few methodologies sufficiently detailed to guide an integrated KT research approach for a population health study. This paper argues for a clearly articulated collaborative KT approach to be embedded within the research design from the outset. DISCUSSION Population health studies are complex in their own right, and strategies to engage the local community in adopting new interventions are often fraught with considerable challenges. In order to maximise the impact of population health research, more explicit KT strategies need to be developed from the outset. We present four propositions, arising from our work in developing a KT framework for a population health study. These cover the need for an explicit theory-informed conceptual framework; formalizing collaborative approaches within the design; making explicit the roles of both the stakeholders and the researchers; and clarifying what counts as evidence. From our deliberations on these propositions, our own co-creating (co-KT) Framework emerged in which KT is defined as both a theoretical and practical framework for actioning the intent of researchers and communities to co-create, refine, implement and evaluate the impact of new knowledge that is sensitive to the context (values, norms and tacit knowledge) where it is generated and used. The co-KT Framework has five steps. These include initial contact and framing the issue; refining and testing knowledge; interpreting, contextualising and adapting knowledge to the local context; implementing and evaluating; and finally, the embedding and translating of new knowledge into practice. SUMMARY Although descriptions of how to incorporate KT into research designs are increasing, current theoretical and operational frameworks do not generally span a holistic process from knowledge co-creation to knowledge application and implementation within one project. Population health studies may have greater health impact when KT is incorporated early and explicitly into the research design. This, we argue, will require that particular attention be paid to collaborative approaches, stakeholder identification and engagement, the nature and sources of evidence used, and the role of the research team working with the local study community.Alison Kitson, Kathryn Powell, Elizabeth Hoon, Jonathan Newbury, Anne Wilson, Justin Beilb

Translation of cytoplasmic UBA1 contributes to VEXAS syndrome pathogenesis

Somatic mutations in UBA1 cause VEXAS (Vacuoles, E1 ubiquitin activating enzyme, X-linked, Autoinflammatory Somatic) syndrome, an adult-onset inflammatory disease with an overlap of hematologic manifestations. VEXAS syndrome is characterized by a high mortality rate and significant clinical heterogeneity. We sought to determine independent predictors of survival in VEXAS and to understand the mechanistic basis for these factors. We analyzed 83 patients with somatic pathogenic variants in UBA1 at p.Met41 (p.Met41Leu/Thr/Val), the start codon for translation of the cytoplasmic isoform of UBA1 (UBA1b). Patients with the p.Met41Val genotype were most likely to have an undifferentiated inflammatory syndrome. Multivariate analysis showed ear chondritis was associated with increased survival, while transfusion dependence and the p.Met41Val variant were independently associated with decreased survival. Using in vitro models and patient-derived cells, we demonstrate that p.Met41Val variant supports less UBA1b translation than either p.Met41Leu or p.Met41Thr, providing a molecular rationale for decreased survival. In addition, we show that these three canonical VEXAS variants produce more UBA1b than any of the six other possible single nucleotide variants within this codon. Finally, we report a patient, clinically diagnosed with VEXAS syndrome, with two novel mutations in UBA1 occurring in cis on the same allele. One mutation (c.121 A>T; p.Met41Leu) caused severely reduced translation of UBA1b in a reporter assay, but co-expression with the second mutation (c.119 G>C; p.Gly40Ala) rescued UBA1b levels to those of canonical mutations. We conclude that regulation of residual UBA1b translation is fundamental to the pathogenesis of VEXAS syndrome and contributes to disease prognosis