Research-policy engagement activities and research impact
Nursing and health science researcher perspectives
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12889157 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Alice Windle (0000-0002-5968-2910, Flinders University, corresponding author), Joanne Arciuli (0000-0002-7467-9939, Flinders University) |
| Year | 2022 |
| Volume | 19 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 360-377 |
| Publication date | 2022-11-12 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Evidence & Policy (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1744-2648 • E-ISSN: 1744-2656 |
| Publisher | Policy Press (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1332/174426421x16645282386107 |
| OpenAlex | W4308833926 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 13 |
Background: Strategies to help researchers use the research evidence they (co)produce to inform policy should be tailored to the context. Yet there is little guidance on research-policy engagement activities in nursing and health sciences disciplines. Aims and objectives: We explored the experiences and perspectives of nursing and health sciences researchers at different career stages, regarding research-policy engagement activities and their impacts on policy. We also explored researchers’ understanding of terminology and theory regarding research-policy engagement. Methods: We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with 17 researchers, at various career stages, and conducted content and thematic analysis of the data. Findings: ‘Disseminating and communicating research’, and ‘building professional partnerships’ were the most common types of activity, with senior researchers favouring the latter. Early and mid-career researchers favoured the former, citing the need to build credibility and track record before engaging with policy actors. We identified individual and contextual factors that influence policy impact and researchers’ capacity to engage in such activities. Researchers’ conceptions and understanding regarding evidence-informed policymaking theory and process varied. Terminology also varied, with ‘knowledge translation’ the most common term. Discussion and conclusions: Despite evidence indicating the limited effectiveness of dissemination activities on policy, researchers pursue such efforts, to enable the formation of relationships with influential policy actors and policy impact in the longer term, and because of academia’s drive for research outputs. Researchers would benefit from supportive organisational contexts and greater knowledge of research-policy engagement theory, evidence and practice, through tailored workshops addressing relational and political considerations, as well as structured mentoring
Context (archaeology · Credibility · Knowledge management · Knowledge translation · Political science · Public relations · Qualitative research · Social science · Sociology · Terminology · Thematic analysis · Evaluation and Performance Assessment · Health Policy Implementation Science · Nursing Education, Practice, and Leadership · Psychology
Social science in medicine
New directions in evidence-based policy research
Rethinking knowledge translation for public health policy
What works to promote research-policy engagement
A recipe for impact? Exploring knowledge requirements in the UK Parliament and beyond
Changes Not for the Fainthearted
The Many Meanings of Research Utilization
Using thematic analysis in psychology
How Should Academics Engage in Policymaking to Achieve Impact
From "our world" to the "real world
American Behavioral Scientist
The Two-Communities Theory and Knowledge Utilization
| Citations per year | 0.33 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2023 - 2023 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |