521 research outputs found

    Determining research knowledge infrastructure for healthcare systems: a qualitative study

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>This study examines research knowledge infrastructures (RKIs) found in health systems. An RKI is defined as any instrument (<it>i.e</it>., programs, interventions, tools) implemented in order to facilitate access, dissemination, exchange, and/or use of evidence in healthcare organisations. Based on an environmental scan (17 key informant interviews) and scoping review (26 studies), we found support for a framework that we developed that outlines components that a health system can have in its RKI. The broad domains are climate for research use, research production, activities used to link research to action, and evaluation.</p> <p>The objective of the current study is to profile the RKI of three types of health system organisations--regional health authorities, primary care practices, and hospitals--in two Canadian provinces to determine the current mix of components these organisations have in their RKI, their experience with these components, and their views about future RKI initiatives.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This study will include semistructured telephone interviews with a purposive sample region of a senior management team member, library/resource centre manager, and a 'knowledge broker' in three regional health authorities, five or six purposively sampled hospitals, and five or six primary care practices in Ontario and Quebec, for a maximum of 71 interviewees. The interviews will explore (a) which RKI components have proven helpful, (b) barriers and facilitators in implementing RKI components, and (c) views about next steps in further development of RKIs.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This is the first qualitative examination of potential RKI efforts that can increase the use of research evidence in health system decision making. We anticipate being able to identify broadly applicable insights about important next steps in building effective RKIs. Some of the identified RKI components may increase the use of research evidence by decision makers, which may then lead to more informed decisions.</p

    Exactly Solvable Model of Monomer-Monomer Reactions on a Two-Dimensional Random Catalytic Substrate

    Full text link
    We present an \textit{exactly solvable} model of a monomer-monomer A+BA + B \to \emptyset reaction on a 2D inhomogeneous, catalytic substrate and study the equilibrium properties of the two-species adsorbate. The substrate contains randomly placed catalytic bonds of mean density qq which connect neighboring adsorption sites. The interacting AA and BB (monomer) species undergo continuous exchanges with corresponding adjacent gaseous reservoirs. A reaction A+BA + B \to \emptyset takes place instantaneously if AA and BB particles occupy adsorption sites connected by a catalytic bond. We find that for the case of \textit{annealed} disorder in the placement of the catalytic bonds the reaction model under study can be mapped onto the general spin S=1S = 1 (GS1) model. Here we concentrate on a particular case in which the model reduces to an exactly solvable Blume-Emery-Griffiths (BEG) model (T. Horiguchi, Phys. Lett. A {\bf 113}, 425 (1986); F.Y. Wu, Phys. Lett. A, {\bf 116}, 245 (1986)) and derive an exact expression for the disorder-averaged equilibrium pressure of the two-species adsorbate. We show that at equal partial vapor pressures of the AA and BB species this system exhibits a second-order phase transition which reflects a spontaneous symmetry breaking with large fluctuations and progressive coverage of the entire substrate by either one of the species.Comment: 4 pages, 2 figures, submitted to Phys. Rev. Let

    Evidence-informed health policy 1 – Synthesis of findings from a multi-method study of organizations that support the use of research evidence

    Get PDF
    Background: Organizations have been established in many countries and internationally to support the use of research evidence by producing clinical practice guidelines, undertaking health technology assessments, and/or directly supporting the use of research evidence in developing health policy on an international, national, and state or provincial level. Learning from these organizations can reduce the need to 'reinvent the wheel' and inform decisions about how best to organize support for such organizations, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: We undertook a multi-method study in three phases – a survey, interviews, and case descriptions that drew on site visits – and in each of the second and third phases we focused on a purposive sample of those involved in the previous phase. We used the seven main recommendations that emerged from the advice offered in the interviews to organize much of the synthesis of findings across phases and methods. We used a constant comparative method to identify themes from across phases and methods. Results: Seven recommendations emerged for those involved in establishing or leading organizations that support the use of research evidence in developing health policy: 1) collaborate with other organizations; 2) establish strong links with policymakers and involve stakeholders in the work; 3) be independent and manage conflicts of interest among those involved in the work; 4) build capacity among those working in the organization; 5) use good methods and be transparent in the work; 6) start small, have a clear audience and scope, and address important questions; and 7) be attentive to implementation considerations, even if implementation is not a remit. Four recommendations emerged for the World Health Organization (WHO) and other international organizations and networks: 1) support collaborations among organizations; 2) support local adaptation efforts; 3) mobilize support; and 4) create global public goods. Conclusion: This synthesis of findings from a multi-method study, along with the more detailed findings from each of the three phases of the study (which are reported in the three following articles in the series), provide a strong basis on which researchers, policymakers, international organizations (and networks) like WHO can respond to the growing chorus of voices calling for efforts to support the use of research evidence in developing health policy

    Research, evidence and policymaking: the perspectives of policy actors on improving uptake of evidence in health policy development and implementation in Uganda

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Use of evidence in health policymaking plays an important role, especially in resource-constrained settings where informed decisions on resource allocation are paramount. Several knowledge translation (KT) models have been developed, but few have been applied to health policymaking in low income countries. If KT models are expected to explain evidence uptake and implementation, or lack of it, they must be contextualized and take into account the specificity of low income countries for example, the strong influence of donors. The main objective of this research is to elaborate a Middle Range Theory (MRT) of KT in Uganda that can also serve as a reference for other low- and middle income countries.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This two-step study employed qualitative approaches to examine the principal barriers and facilitating factors to KT. Step 1 involved a literature review and identification of common themes. The results informed the development of the initial MRT, which details the facilitating factors and barriers to KT at the different stages of research and policy development. In Step 2, these were further refined through key informant interviews with policymakers and researchers in Uganda. Deductive content and thematic analysis was carried out to assess the degree of convergence with the elements of the initial MRT and to identify other emerging issues.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Review of the literature revealed that the most common emerging facilitating factors could be grouped under institutional strengthening for KT, research characteristics, dissemination, partnerships and political context. The analysis of interviews, however, showed that policymakers and researchers ranked institutional strengthening for KT, research characteristics and partnerships as the most important. New factors emphasized by respondents were the use of mainstreamed structures within MoH to coordinate and disseminate research, the separation of roles between researchers and policymakers, and the role of the community and civil society in KT.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>This study refined an initial MRT on KT in policymaking in the health sector in Uganda that was based on a literature review. It provides a framework that can be used in empirical research of the process of KT on specific policy issues.</p

    Density of states determined from Monte Carlo simulations

    Full text link
    We describe method for calculating the density of states by combining several canonical monte carlo runs. We discuss how critical properties reveal themselves in g(ϵ)g(\epsilon) and demonstrate this by applying the method several different phase transitions. We also demonstrate how this can used to calculate the conformal charge, where the dominating numerical method has traditionally been transfer matrix.Comment: Major revision of paper, several references added throughout. Current version accepted for publication in Phys. Rev.

    Community capacity to acquire, assess, adapt, and apply research evidence: a survey of Ontario's HIV/AIDS sector

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Community-based organizations (CBOs) are important stakeholders in health systems and are increasingly called upon to use research evidence to inform their advocacy, program planning, and service delivery. To better support CBOs to find and use research evidence, we sought to assess the capacity of CBOs in the HIV/AIDS sector to acquire, assess, adapt, and apply research evidence in their work.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We invited executive directors of HIV/AIDS CBOs in Ontario, Canada (n = 51) to complete the Canadian Health Services Research Foundation's "Is Research Working for You?" survey.</p> <p>Findings</p> <p>Based on responses from 25 organizations that collectively provide services to approximately 32,000 clients per year with 290 full-time equivalent staff, we found organizational capacity to acquire, assess, adapt, and apply research evidence to be low. CBO strengths include supporting a culture that rewards flexibility and quality improvement, exchanging information within their organization, and ensuring that their decision-making processes have a place for research. However, CBO Executive Directors indicated that they lacked the skills, time, resources, incentives, and links with experts to acquire research, assess its quality and reliability, and summarize it in a user-friendly way.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Given the limited capacity to find and use research evidence, we recommend a capacity-building strategy for HIV/AIDS CBOs that focuses on providing the tools, resources, and skills needed to more consistently acquire, assess, adapt, and apply research evidence. Such a strategy may be appropriate in other sectors and jurisdictions as well given that CBO Executive Directors in the HIV/AIDS sector in Ontario report low capacity despite being in the enviable position of having stable government infrastructure in place to support them, benefiting from long-standing investment in capacity building, and being part of an active provincial network. CBOs in other sectors and jurisdictions that have fewer supports may have comparable or lower capacity. Future research should examine a larger sample of CBO Executive Directors from a range of sectors and jurisdictions.</p
    corecore