Collective action for knowledge mobilisation: a realist evaluation of the collaborations for leadership in applied health research and care

Research report


Rycroft-Malone, J., Burton, C., Wilkinson, J., Harvey, G., McCormack, B., Baker, R., Dopson, S., Graham, I., Staniszewska, S., Thompson, C., Ariss, S., Melville-Richards, L. and Williams, L. 2015. Collective action for knowledge mobilisation: a realist evaluation of the collaborations for leadership in applied health research and care. UK NIHR Journals Library. doi:10.3310/hsdr03440
AuthorsRycroft-Malone, J., Burton, C., Wilkinson, J., Harvey, G., McCormack, B., Baker, R., Dopson, S., Graham, I., Staniszewska, S., Thompson, C., Ariss, S., Melville-Richards, L. and Williams, L.
TypeResearch report
Abstract

Background: The establishment of the Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRCs) was the culmination of a number of policy initiatives to bridge the gap between evidence and practice. CLAHRCs were created and funded to facilitate development of partnerships and connect the worlds of academia and practice in an effort to improve patient outcomes through the conduct and application of applied health research.

Objectives: Our starting point was to test the theory that bringing higher education institutions and health-care organisations closer together catalyses knowledge mobilisation. The overall purpose was to develop explanatory theory regarding implementation through CLAHRCs and answer the question ‘what works, for whom, why and in what circumstances?’. The study objectives focused on identifying and tracking implementation mechanisms and processes over time; determining what influences whether or not and how research is used in CLAHRCs; investigating the role played by boundary objects in the success or failure of implementation; and determining whether or not and how CLAHRCs develop and sustain interactions and communities of practice.

Methods: This study was a longitudinal realist evaluation using multiple qualitative case studies, incorporating stakeholder engagement and formative feedback. Three CLAHRCs were studied in depth over four rounds of data collection through a process of hypothesis generation, refining, testing and programme theory specification. Data collection included interviews, observation, documents, feedback sessions and an interpretive forum.

Findings: Knowledge mobilisation in CLAHRCs was a function of a number of interconnected issues that provided more or less conducive conditions for collective action. The potential of CLAHRCs to close the metaphorical ‘know–do’ gap was dependent on historical regional relationships, their approach to engaging different communities, their architectures, what priorities were set and how, and providing additional resources for implementation, including investment in roles and activities to bridge and broker boundaries. Additionally, we observed a balance towards conducting research rather than implementing it. Key mechanisms of interpretations of collaborative action, opportunities for connectivity, facilitation, motivation, review and reflection, and unlocking barriers/releasing potential were important to the processes and outcomes of CLAHRCs. These mechanisms operated in different contexts including stakeholders’ positioning, or ‘where they were coming from’, governance arrangements, availability of resources, competing drivers, receptiveness to learning and evaluation, and alignment of structures, positions and resources. Preceding conditions influenced the course and journey of the CLAHRCs in a path-dependent way. We observed them evolving over time and their development led to the accumulation of different types of impacts, from those that were conceptual to, later in their life cycle, those that were more direct.

Conclusions: Most studies of implementation focus on researching one-off projects, so a strength of this study was in researching a systems approach to knowledge mobilisation over time. Although CLAHRC-like approaches show promise, realising their full potential will require a longer and more sustained focus on relationship building, resource allocation and, in some cases, culture change. This reinforces the point that research implementation within a CLAHRC model is a long-term investment and one that is set within a life cycle of organisational collaboration.

KeywordsKnowledge Mobilisation; Applied Health; Research; Collaboration; Leadership
Year2015
PublisherNIHR Journals Library
Place of publicationUK
Page range1-200
ISSN2050-4349
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)doi:10.3310/hsdr03440
Official URLhttp://doi.org/10.3310/hsdr03440
Publication dates
PrintDec 2015
Publication process dates
AcceptedJan 2015
Deposited22 May 2020
FunderHealth Services and Delivery Research
References

1. Graham ID, Tetroe J. How to translate health research knowledge into effective healthcare action.
Healthc Q 2007;10:20–2. http://dx.doi.org/10.12927/hcq..18919
2. Rosenberg RN. Translating biomedical research to the bedside, a national crisis and call to action.
JAMA 2003;289:1305–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.289.10.1305
3. US Department of Veterans Affairs. QUERI: Quality Enhancement Research Initiative.
URL: www.queri.research.va.gov/ (accessed 2 October 2015).
4. ZonMw. Programme: Academic Collaborative Centres Public Health. URL: www.zonmw.nl/en/
programmes/academic-collaborative-centres-public-health/links/ (accessed 2 October 2015).
5. Brooks P. Explainer: Why Australia Needs Advanced Health Research Centres. The Conversation;
2011. URL: www.theconversation.com/explainer-why-australia-needs-advanced-health-researchcentres-
1139 (accessed 2 October 2015).
6. Fisk NM, Wesslingh SL, Beilby JJ, Glasgow NJ, Puddey IB, Robinson BG, et al. Academic health
science centres in Australia: let’s get competitive. Med J Aust 2011;194:59–60.
7. Department of Health. Best Research for Best Health: A New National Health Research Strategy.
The NHS Contribution to Health Research in England. London: Department of Health; 2006.
8. Cooksey D. A Review of UK Health Research Funding. London: HM Treasury; 2006.
9. Clinical Effectiveness Research Agenda Group. Implementation Research Agenda Report. 2008.
URL: http://preview.implementationscience.com/content/supplementary/1748-...–18-s1.pdf
(accessed 2 October 2015).
10. Eccles M, Armstrong D, Baker R, Clearly K, Davies H, Davies S, et al. An implementation research
agenda. Implement Sci 2009;4:18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-4-18
11. NHS Confederation. Integrating Research into Practice: The CLAHRC Experience. Health Services
Research Network Briefing 245. NHS Confederation; 2012.
12. Wilson PM, Petticrew M, Calnan MW, Nazareth I. Disseminating research findings: what should
researchers do? A systematic scoping review of conceptual frameworks. Implement Sci
2010;5:91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-5-91
13. Harvey G, Loftus-Hills A, Rycroft-Malone J, Titchen A, Kitson A, McCormack B, et al. The many
meanings of evidence: implications for the translational science agenda in healthcare. Int J Health
Policy Manag 2013;1:1–2. http://dx.doi.org/10.15171/ijhpm.2013.34
14. Glasziou P. The paths from research to improved health outcomes. ACP J Club 2005;142:A8–10.
15. Rycroft-Malone J, Kitson AL, Harvey G, McCormack B, Seers K, Titchen A, et al. Ingredients
for change: revisiting a conceptual framework. Qual Safe Health Care 2002;11:174–80.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/qhc.11.2.174
16. Greenhalgh T, Robert G, MacFarlane F, Bate P, Kyriakidou O. Diffusion of innovations in service
organisations: systematic review and recommendations. Milbank Q 2004;82:581–629.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0887-378X.2004.00325.x
17. Graham ID, Logan J, Harrison MB, Straus SE, Tetroe J, Caswell W, et al. Lost in translation:
time for a map? J Contin Educ Health Prof 2006;26:13–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/chp.47
18. Nutley SM, Walter I, Davies HTO. Using Evidence. London: Policy Press; 2007.
19. Kitson Al, Harvey G, McCormack B. Enabling the implementation of evidence-based practice: a
conceptual framework. Qual Health Care 1998;7:149–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/qshc.7.3.149
20. Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE, Kirsh SR, Alexander JA, Lowery JC. Fostering implementation
of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing
implementation science. Implement Sci 2009;7:50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-4-50
21. Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR). More about Knowledge Translation at CIHR. 2014.
URL: www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/39033.html#Definition (accessed 26 March 2014).
22. Rycroft-Malone J. From knowing to doing: from the academy to practice. Comment on ‘The
many meanings of evidence: implications for the translational science agenda in healthcare’.
Int J Health Policy Manag 2014;2:1–2. http://dx.doi.org/10.15171/ijhpm.2014.08
23. Walshe K, Davies HTO. Health research, development and innovation in England from 1988 to
2013: from research productions to knowledge mobilisation. J Health Serv Res Policy
2013;18:1–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1355819613502011
24. Best A, Holmes B. Systems thinking, knowledge and action: towards better models and methods.
Evid Policy 2010;6:145–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1332/174426410X502284
25. Best A, Greenhalgh T, Lewis S, Saul J, Carroll S, Bitz J. Large-system transformation in health care:
a realist review. Milbank Q 2012;90:421–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0009.2012.00670.x
26. Van de Ven AH. Engaged Scholarship: A Guide for Organisational and Social Research. Oxford:
Oxford University Press; 2007.
27. Dopson S, Bennett C, Fitzgerald L, Ferlie E, Fischer M, Ledger J, et al. Health Care Managers’
Access and Use of Management Research: Final Report. Southampton: NIHR Service Delivery and
Organisation Programme; 2012.
28. Rycroft-Malone J, Wilkinson J, Burton C, Andrews G, Ariss S, Baker R, et al. Implementing health
research through academic and clinical partnerships: a realistic evaluation of the Collaborations
for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC). Implement Sci 2011;6:74.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-6-74
29. Grimshaw JM, Eccles MP, Lavis JN, Hill SJ, Squires J. Knowledge translation of research findings.
Implement Sci 2012;7:50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-7-50
30. Jansson SM, Benoit C, Casey L, Phillips R, Burns D. In for the long haul: knowledge translation
between academic and nonprofit organizations. Qual Health Res 2010;20:131–43.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1049732309349808
31. Van Raak A, Paulus A, Mur-Veeman I. Why do health and social care providers co-operate?
Health Policy 2005;74:13–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2004.12.006
32. Denis J-L, Lomas J. Convergent evolution: the academic and policy roots of collaborative research.
J Health Serv Res Policy 2003;8(Suppl. 2):1–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1258/135581903322405108
33. Denis J-L, Lehoux P, Hivon M, Champagne F. Creating a new articulation between research and
practice through policy? The views and experiences of researchers and practitioners. J Health Serv
Res Policy 2003;8(Suppl. 2):44–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1258/135581903322405162
34. Woodland R, Hutton M. Evaluating organisational collaborations: suggested entry points and
strategies. Am J Eval 2012;33:366–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1098214012440028
35. Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Westhorp G, Pawson R. Realist methods in medical education research:
what are they and what can they contribute? Med Educ 2012;46:89–96. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1111/j.1365-2923.2011.04045.x
36. Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Westhorp G, Buckingham J, Pawson R. RAMESES publication standards:
realist synthesis. BMC Med 2013;11:21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-11-21
37. McCormack B, Rycroft-Malone J, DeCorby K, Hutchinson A, Bucknall T, Kent B, et al. A realist
review of interventions and strategies to promote evidence-informed healthcare: a focus on
change agency. Implement Sci 2013;8:107. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-8-107
38. Saul JE, Willis CD, Bitz J, Best A. A time-responsive tool for informing policy making: rapid realist
review. Implement Sci 2013;8:103. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-8-103
39. Rycroft-Malone J, Wilkinson J, Burton C, Harvey G, McCormack B, Graham I, et al. Collaborative
action around implementation in collaborations for leadership in applied health research and care:
towards a programme theory. J Health Serv Res Policy 2013;18:13–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/
1355819613498859
40. Thomson A, Perry J, Miller T. Conceptualising and measuring collaboration. J Public Adm Res
Theory 2007;19:23–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum036
41. Williams P, Sullivan H. Working in Collaboration: Learning from Theory and Practice. Cardiff:
National Leadership and Innovation Agency for Healthcare; 2007.
42. Gray B. Collaborating: Finding Common Ground for Multiparty Problems. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass Publishers; 1989.
43. Amabile T, Patterson C, Mueller J, Wojcik T, Odomirok P, Marsch M, et al. Academic–practitioner
collaboration in management research: a case of cross-profession collaboration. Acad Manag J
2001;44:418–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3069464
44. Phillips N, Lawrence B, Hardy C. Interorganizational collaboration and the dynamics of
institutional fields. J Manag Stud 2000;37:23–43.
45. Sibbald S. A Focused Literature Review on Integrated Knowledge Translation Partnerships (IKTP).
Ottawa, ON: Canadian Institutes of Health Research; 2010.
46. Pfaff K, Baxter P, Jack S, Ploeg J. An integrative review of the factors influencing new graduate
nurse engagement in interprofessional collaboration. J Adv Nurs 2013;70:4–20. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1111/jan.12195
47. Himmelman AT. On the Theory and Practice of Transformational Collaboration: From Social
Service to Social Justice. In Huxham C, editor. Creating Collaborative Advantage. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications; 1996. pp. 19–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446221600.n2
48. Ring PS, van de Ven AH, Developmental processes of cooperative interorganisational
relationships. Acad Manage Rev 1994;19:90–118.
49. Rynes SL, Bartunek J, Daft R. Across the great divide: knowledge creation and transfer between
practitioners and academics. Acad Manage J 2001;44:340–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3069460
50. Olson CA, Balmer JT, Mejicano GC. Factors contributing to successful inter-organisational
collaboration: the case of CS2day. J Contin Educ Health Prof 2011;31:S3–12. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1002/chp.20143
51. Ovretveit J, Bate P, Cleary P, Cretin S, Gustafson D, McInnes K, et al. Quality collaboratives: lessons
from research. Qual Safe Health Care 2002;11:345–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/qhc.11.4.345
52. Shortell SM, Zukosli AP, Alexander JA, Bazzoli GJ, Conrad DA, Hasnin-Wynia R, et al. Evaluating
partnerships for community health improvement: tracking the footprints. J Health Polit Policy Law
2002;27:49–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/03616878-27-1-49
53. Hall KL, Stokols D, Moder RP, Taylor BK, Thornquist MD, Nebeling LC, et al. Findings from the
National Cancer Institute’s TREC year-one evaluation study. Am J Prev Med 2008;35:S161–71.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2008.03.035
54. Wilson T, Berwick DM, Cleary PD. What do collaborative improvement projects do? Experience
form seven countries. Jt Comm J Qual Saf 2003;29:85–93.
55. Baker EA, Wilkerson R, Brennan LK. Identifying the role of community partnerships in creating
change to support active living. Am J Prev Med 2012;43:S290–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.amepre.2012.07.003
56. Purcal C, Muir K, Patulny R, Thomson C, Flaxman S. Does partnership funding improve
coordination and collaboration among early childhood services? Experiences from the
Communities for Children programme. Child Fam Soc Work 2011;16:474–84. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1111/j.1365-2206.2011.00766.x
57. Goes JB, Ho Park S. Inter-organisational links and innovation: the case of hospital services.
Acad Manag J 1997;40:673–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/257058
58. Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health Research. Academic–NHS–Industry
Collaboration in Experimental Medicine. London: Department of Health; 2011.
59. Pawson R. Evidence-Based Policy: A Realist Perspective. London: Sage Publications; 2006.
60. Blevins D, Farmer MS, Edlund C, Sullivan G, Kirchner JE. Collaborative research between clinicians
and researchers: a multiple case study of implementation. Implement Sci 2010;5:76. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1186/1748-5908-5-76
61. Kegler MC, Steckler A, McIerou K, Malek SH. Factors that contribute to effective community
health promotion coalitions: a study of 10 Project ASSIST coalitions in North Carolina.
Health Educ Behav 1998;25:338–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/109019819802500308
62. Lasker RD, Weiss ES, Miller R. Partnership synergy: a practical framework for studying and
strengthening the collaborative advantage. Milbank Q 2001;79:179–205. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1111/1468-0009.00203
63. Lesser J, Oscos-Sanchez MA. Community–academic research partnerships with vulnerable
populations. Annu Rev Nurs Res 2007;25:317–57.
64. Stokols D, Misra S, Moder RP, Hall KL, Taylor BK. The ecology of team science: understanding
contextual influences on transdisciplinary collaboration. Am J Prev Med 2008;35:S96–114.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2008.05.003
65. Roussos ST, Fawcett SB. A review of collaborative partnerships as a strategy for improving
community health. Annu Rev Public Health 2000;21:369–402. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/
annurev.publhealth.21.1.369
66. Jackson L, Langille L, Lyons R, Hughes J, Martin D, Winstanley V. Does moving from a high-poverty
to lower-poverty neighborhood improve mental health? A realist review of ‘Moving to
Opportunity’. Health Place 2009;15:961–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2009.03.003
67. Dieleman M, Kane S, Zwanikken P, Gerretsen B. Realist Review and Synthesis of Retention Studies
for Health Workers in Rural and Remote Areas. Technical report No 1. Geneva: World Health
Organisation; 2011.
68. Rycroft-Malone J, McCormack B, Hutchinson AM, DeCorby K, Bucknall TK, Kent B, et al. Realist
synthesis: illustrating the method for implementation research. Implement Sci 2012;7:33.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-7-33
69. Lantz PM, Viruell-Fuentes E, Israel BA, Softley D, Guzman R. Can communities and academia
work together on public health research? Evaluation results from a community-based participatory
research partnership in Detroit. J Urban Health 2001;78:495–507. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/
jurban/78.3.495
70. Best A, Hall N. Rapid Review on Inter-organizational Partnerships. Vancouver, BC:
Healthshares; 2006.
71. Ovseiko PV, Heitmueller A, Allen P, Davies SM, Wells G, Ford GA, et al. Improving accountability
through alignment: the role of academic health science centres and networks in England.
BMC Health Serv Res 2014;14:24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-14-24
72. Kilbourne A, Neumann M, Waxmonsky J, Bauer M, Kim H, Pincus H, et al. Public–academic
partnerships: evidence-based implementation: the role of sustained community-based practice
and research partnerships. Psychiatr Serv 2012;63:205–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1176/
appi.ps.201200032
73. Kreuter MW, Lezin NA, Young LA. Evaluating community-based collaborative mechanisms:
implications for practitioners. Health Promot Pract 2000;1:49–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/
152483990000100109
74. Butler J, Fryer CS, Reed EA, Thomas SB. Utilising the School Health Index to build collaboration
between a university and an urban school district. J Sch Health 2011;81:774–82. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1111/j.1746-1561.2011.00657.x
75. Provan KG, Nakama L, Veazie MA, Teufel-Shone NI, Huddleston C. Building community capacity
around chronic disease services through a collaborative inter-organisational network. Health Educ
Behav 2003;30:646–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1090198103255366
76. Huxham C. Theorizing collaboration practice. Public Manag Rev 2003;5:401–23. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1080/1471903032000146964
77. Bazzoli G, Casey E, Alexander J, Conrad D, Shortell S, Sofaer S, et al. Collaborative initiatives:
where the rubber meets the road in community partnerships. Med Care Res Rev 2003;60:63S–94S.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1077558703259082
78. Pinto RM. Community perspectives on factors that influence collaboration in public health
research. Health Educ Behav 2009;36:930–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1090198108328328
79. Vangen S, Huxham C. Nurturing collaborative relations: building trust in interorganizational
collaborations. J Appl Behav Sci 2003;39:5–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0021886303039001001
80. Clark MA, Rogers ML, Boergers J, Kahler CW, Ramsey S, Saadeh FM, et al. A transdisciplinary
approach to protocol development for tobacco control research: a case study. Transl Behav Med
2012;2:431–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13142-012-0164-1
81. Ross S, Lavis J, Rodriguez C, Woodside J, Denis J-L. Partnership experiences: involving
decision-makers in the research process. J Health Serv Res Policy 2003;8:S26–34. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1258/135581903322405144
82. Nembhard LM. When do Organisations Learn from Each Other? Inter-Organisational Learning in
Health Care. Industry Studies Annual Conference, Boston, MA, 2008. URL: www.web.mit.edu/
is08/pdf/Nembhard.pdf (accessed 26 November 2015).
83. Puga F, Stevens KR, Patel DI. Adopting best practices from team science in a healthcare
improvement research network: the impact on dissemination and implementation. Nurs Res Pract
2013;2013:814360. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/814360
84. Kitson AL, Rycroft-Malone J, Harvey G, McCormack B, Seers K, Titchen A. Evaluating the
successful implementation of evidence into practice using the PARIHS framework: theoretical and
practical challenges. Implement Sci 2008;3:1. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-3-1
85. Pawson R. The Science of Evaluation: A Realist Manifesto. London: Sage Publications; 2013.
86. Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic Evaluation. London: Sage Publications; 1997.
87. Tilley N. Realistic Evaluation: An Overview. The Founding Conference of the Danish Evaluation
Society, 2000. URL: http://evidence-basedmanagement.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/
nick_tilley.pdf (accessed 2 October 2015).
88. Timmins P, Miller C. Making evaluations realistic: the challenge of complexity. Support Learn
2007;22:9–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9604.2007.00439.x
89. Dixon-Woods M. The Problem of Context in Quality Improvement Work. In The Health
Foundation, editor. Perspectives on Context: A Series of Short Essays Considering the Role of
Context in Successful Quality Improvement. London: The Health Foundation; 2014. pp. 89–101.
90. Wilson V, McCormack B. Critical realism as emancipatory action: the case for realistic evaluation
in practice development. Nurs Philos 2006;7:45–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-769X.2006.
00248.x
91. Westhorp G, Prins E, Kusters C, Hultink M, Guijt I, Brouwers J. Realist Evaluation: An Overview.
Report from an Expert Seminar. Wageningen: Wageningen UR Centre for Development
Innovation; 2011.
92. Astbury B, Leeuw FL. Unpacking black boxes: mechanisms and theory building in evaluation.
Am J Eval 2010;31:363–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1098214010371972
93. Williams L. What Works? A Realist Evaluation of the Role of Intermediaries in Promoting Best
Practice in Infection Prevention and Control. Bangor: Bangor University; 2013.
94. Kazi M. Realist Evaluation in Practice: Health and Social Work. London: Sage Publications; 2003.
95. Yin RK. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. 2nd edn. London: Sage Publications; 1994.
96. Yin RK. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. 3rd edn. London: Sage Publications; 2003.
97. Pawson R, Sridharan S. Theory Driven Evaluation of a Public Health Programme. In Killoran A,
Kelly MP, editors. Evidence-Based Public Health Effectiveness and Efficiency. Oxford: Oxford
University Press; 2010. pp. 43–62.
98. Rycroft-Malone J, Harvey G, Seers K, Kitson A, McCormack B, Titchen A. An exploration of the
factors that influence the implementation of evidence into practice. J Clin Nurs 2004;13:913–24.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2004.01007.x
99. Patton MQ. Utilization Focused Evaluation. 4th edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications; 2008.
100. Guba EG, Lincoln YS. Fourth Generation Evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications; 1989.
101. Spradley JP. Participant Observation. Belmont, CA: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston; 1980.
102. Miles MB, Huberman AM. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. 2nd edn.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 1994.
103. Office for National Statistics. Census: Aggregate Data (England and Wales). UK Data Service
Census Support; 2011. URL: http://infuse.mimas.ac.uk (accessed 2 October 2015).
104. Office for National Statistics. Region and Country Profiles: Key Statistics and Profiles. 2012.
URL: http://census.ukdataservice.ac.uk/use-data/citing-data (accessed 2 October 2015).
105. Public Health England. English Indices of Deprivation. 2012. URL: www.apho.org.uk/resource/
view.aspx?RID=125886 (accessed 2 October 2015).
106. Parent R, Roy M, St-Jacques D. A systems-based dynamic knowledge transfer capacity model.
J Knowl Manag 2007;11:81–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13673270710832181
107. Walter I, Nutley S, Percy-Smith J, McNeish D, Frost S. Knowledge Review 7: Improving the Use of
Research in Social Care Practice. London: Social Care Institute for Excellence; 2004.
108. National Institute for Health Research. CLAHRC – Call for Proposals for Pilots. URL: www.nihr.ac.
uk/files/pdfs/CLAHRC%20-%20Call%20for%20Proposals%20for%20Pilots.pdf (accessed
7 July 2014).
109. Star SL, Griesemer JR. Institutional ecology, ‘translations’ and boundary objects: amateurs and
professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology. Soc Stud Sci 1989;19:387–420.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/030631289019003001
110. Allen D. From boundary concept to boundary object: the practice and politics of care pathway
development. Soc Sci Med 2009;69:354–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.05.002
111. Dopson S, Fitzgerald L. Knowledge to Action? Evidence-Based Health Care in Context. Oxford:
Oxford University Press; 2005. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199259014.001.0001
112. Crammer A, Morgan D, Stewart N, McGilton K, Rycroft-Malone J, Dopson S, et al. The hidden/
complexity of long-term care: how context mediates knowledge translation and use of best
practices. Gerontologist 2014;54:1013–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnt068
113. Stetler CB, Ritchie JA, Rycroft-Malone J, Shultz AA, Charns MP. Institutionalising evidence-based
practice: an organizational case study using a model of strategic change. Implement Sci
2009;4:78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-4-78
114. Taylor JR, Van Every EJ. The Emergent Organization: Communication as its Site and Surface.
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; 2000.
115. Weick KE, Sutcliffe KM, Obstfeld D. Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organ Sci
2005;16:409–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1050.0133
116. Greenhalgh T, Humphrey T, Hughes J, MacFarlane F, Butler C, Pawson R. How do you modernize
a health service? A realist evaluation of whole-scale transformation in London. Milbank Q
2009;87:391–416. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0009.2009.00562.x
117. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Drug Resistant Streptococcus pneumonia
Surveillance Manual. Atlanta, GA: CDC; 2003.
118. Nowotny H, Scott P, Gibbons M. Rethinking Science: Knowledge in an Age of Uncertainty.
Cambridge: Polity Press; 2001.
119. Dickinson H, Glasby J. Why partnership working doesn’t work: pitfalls, problems and possibilities
in English health and social care. Public Manag Rev 2010;12:811–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
14719037.2010.488861
120. Orr K, Bennett M. Public administration scholarship and the politics of co-producing
academic–practitioner research. Publ Admin Rev 2012;22:487–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/
j.1540-6210.2011.02522.x
121. Raisch S, Birkinshaw J. Organizational ambidexterity: antecedents, outcomes, and moderators.
J Manag 2008;34:375–409. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0149206308316058
122. Gherardi S, Nicolini D. Learning in a constellation of interconnected practices: canon or
dissonance. J Manag Stud 2002;39:419–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.t01-1-00298
123. Walter I, Davies H, Nutley S. Increasing research impact through partnerships: evidence from
outside health care. J Health Serv Res Policy 2003;8:S58–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1258/
135581903322405180
124. Pettigrew A, Whipp R. Managing Change for Competitive Success. Oxford: Blackwell; 1991.
125. Sullivan H, Williams P, Jeffares S. Leadership for collaboration. Public Manag Rev 2012;14:41–66.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2011.589617
126. Grint K. Problems, problems, problems: the social construction of ‘leadership’. Hum Relat
2005;58:1467–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0018726705061314
127. Jagosh J, Macaulay AC, Greenhalgh T. Uncovering the benefits of participatory research:
implications of a realist review for health research and practice. Milbank Q 2012;90:311–48.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0009.2012.00665.x
128. Nilsen P, Roback K, Brostrom A, Ellstrom P-E. Creatures of habit: accounting for the role of habit
in implementation research on clinical behaviour change. Implement Sci 2012;7:53.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-7-53
129. Kislov R. Boundary discontinuity in a constellation of interconnected practices. Public Admin
2014;92:307–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/padm.12065
130. Kellog KC, Orlikowski WJ, Yates J. Life in the trading zone: structuring co-ordination across
boundaries in postbureaucratic organisations. Organ Sci 2006;17:22–4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/
orsc.1050.0157
131. Carlile PR. Transferring, translating, and transforming: an integrative framework for managing
knowledge across boundaries. Organ Sci 2004;15:555–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/
orsc.1040.0094
132. Van de Ven AH, Johnson PE. Knowledge for theory and practice. Acad Manage Rev
2006;31:802–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2006.22527385
133. Wenger E, McDermott R, Snyder WM. Cultivating Communities of Practice. Boston, MA: Harvard
Business School Press; 2002.
134. Lave J, Wenger E. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. New York, NY:
Cambridge University Press; 1991. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815355
135. Le May A. Communities of Practice in Health and Social Care. Oxford: Wiley; 2009.
136. Agterberg M, van den Hooff B, Huysman M, Soekijad M. Keeping the wheels turning: the
dynamics of managing networks of practice. J Manag Stud 2010;47:85–108. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00867.x
137. Probst G, Borzillo S. Why communities of practice succeed and why they fail. Eur Manage J
2008;26:335–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2008.05.003
138. Veenswijk MC, Chisalita CM. The importance of power and ideology in communities of practice.
Info Technol People 2007;20:32–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09593840710730545
139. Senge PM. The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. London:
Random House; 1990.
140. Chauhan M, Bankart MJ, Labeit A, Baker R. Characteristics of general practices with numbers of
elective admissions. J Public Health 2012:34:584–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fds024

Permalink -

https://repository.canterbury.ac.uk/item/8v917/collective-action-for-knowledge-mobilisation-a-realist-evaluation-of-the-collaborations-for-leadership-in-applied-health-research-and-care

  • 7
    total views
  • 0
    total downloads
  • 3
    views this month
  • 0
    downloads this month

Export as

Related outputs

A multicentre, randomised controlled trial to compare the clinical and cost-effectiveness of Lee Silverman Voice Treatment versus standard NHS Speech and Language Therapy versus control in Parkinson’s disease: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
Sackley, C. M., Rick, C., Au, P., Brady, M. C., Beaton, G., Burton, C., Caulfield, M., Dickson, S., Dowling, F., Hughes, M., Ives, N., Jowett, S., Masterton-Algar, P., Nicoll, A., Patel, S., Smith, C. H., Woolley, R. and Clarke, C. E. 2020. A multicentre, randomised controlled trial to compare the clinical and cost-effectiveness of Lee Silverman Voice Treatment versus standard NHS Speech and Language Therapy versus control in Parkinson’s disease: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials. 21 (436).
'Function first—be active, stay independent’—Promoting physical activity and physical function in people with long-term conditions by primary care: a protocol for a realist synthesis with embedded co-production and co-design
Law, R-J, Williams, L., Langley, J., Burton, C., Hall, B., Hiscock, J., Morrison, V., Lemmey, A., Partridge, R., Lovell-Smith, C., Gallanders, J. and Williams, N. 2020. 'Function first—be active, stay independent’—Promoting physical activity and physical function in people with long-term conditions by primary care: a protocol for a realist synthesis with embedded co-production and co-design. BMJ Open. 10 (2).
Sleep hygiene education and children with developmental disabilities: Findings from a co-design study
Sutton, J.E., Huws, J.C. and Burton, C. 2019. Sleep hygiene education and children with developmental disabilities: Findings from a co-design study. Journal of Intellectual Disabilities.
Towards safe nurse staffing in England’s National Health Service: progress and pitfalls of policy evolution
Lawless, J., Couch, R., Griffiths, P., Burton, C. and Ball, J. 2019. Towards safe nurse staffing in England’s National Health Service: progress and pitfalls of policy evolution. Health Policy. 123 (6), pp. 590-594.
Brief smoking cessation in acute Welsh hospitals: A realist approach
Davies, S., Burton, C., Williams, L. and Tinkler, A. 2019. Brief smoking cessation in acute Welsh hospitals: A realist approach. Health Promotion International. 35 (2), pp. 244-254.
Understanding how and why de-implementation works in health and care: research protocol for a realist synthesis of evidence
Burton, C., Williams, L., Bucknall, T., Edwards, S., Fisher, D., Hall, B., Harris, G., Jones, P., Makin, M., McBride, A., Meacock, R., Parkinson, J., Rycroft-Malone, J. and Waring, J. 2019. Understanding how and why de-implementation works in health and care: research protocol for a realist synthesis of evidence. Systematic Reviews. 8 (194).
NHS managers’ use of nursing workforce planning and deployment technologies: a realist synthesis
Burton, C., Rycroft-Malone, J., Williams, L., Davies, S., McBride, A., Hall, B., Rowlands, A., Jones, A., Fisher, D., Jones, M. and Caulfield, M. 2018. NHS managers’ use of nursing workforce planning and deployment technologies: a realist synthesis. Southampton (UK) NIHR Journals Library.
NHS managers’ use of nursing workforce planning and deployment technologies: a realist synthesis
Burton, C., Rycroft-Malone, J., Williams, L, Davies, S., McBride, A., Hall, B., Rowlands, A., Jones, A., Fisher, D., Jones, M. and Caulfield, M. 2018. NHS managers’ use of nursing workforce planning and deployment technologies: a realist synthesis. Health Services and Delivery Research. 6 (36).
The generation of consensus guidelines for carrying out process evaluations in rehabilitation research
Masterson-Algar, P., Burton, C. and Rycroft-Malone, J. 2018. The generation of consensus guidelines for carrying out process evaluations in rehabilitation research. BMC Medical Research Methodology. 18 (1), pp. 1-11.
Getting back to life after stroke: co-designing a peer-led coaching intervention to enable stroke survivors to rebuild a meaningful life after stroke
Masterson-Algar, P., Williams, S., Burton, C., Arthur, C., Hoare, Z., Morrison, V., Radford, K., Seddon, D. and Elghenzai, S. 2018. Getting back to life after stroke: co-designing a peer-led coaching intervention to enable stroke survivors to rebuild a meaningful life after stroke. Disability and Rehabilitation. 42 (10), pp. 1359-1372.
Arts-based palliative care training, education and staff development: A scoping review
Turton, B.M., Williams, S., Burton, C.R. and Williams, L. 2018. Arts-based palliative care training, education and staff development: A scoping review. Palliative Medicine. 32 (2).
The PD COMM trial: a protocol for the process evaluation of a randomised trial assessing the effectiveness of two types of SLT for people with Parkinson's disease.
Masterson-Algar, P, Burton, C., Brady, M.C., Nicoll, A., Clarke, C.E., Rick, C., Hughes, M., Au, P., Smith, C.H. and Sackley, C.M. 2017. The PD COMM trial: a protocol for the process evaluation of a randomised trial assessing the effectiveness of two types of SLT for people with Parkinson's disease. Trials. 18 (397), p. 2017.
Managing diabetes in people with dementia: a realist review
Bunn, F., Goodman, C., Jones, P.R., Russell, B., Trivedi, D., Sinclair, A., Bayer, A., Rait, G., Rycroft-Malone, J. and Burton, C. 2017. Managing diabetes in people with dementia: a realist review. Perth, Scotland NIHR Journals Library. doi:10.3310/hta21750
Implementation and trial evidence: a plea for fore-thought
Brocklehurst, P.R., Williams, L., Burton, C., Goodwin, T. and Rycroft-Malone, J. 2017. Implementation and trial evidence: a plea for fore-thought. British Dental Journal. 222 (5), pp. 331-335.
What works for whom in the management of diabetes in people living with dementia: a realist review
Bunn, F., Goodman, C., Jones, P. R., Russell, B., Trivedi, D., Sinclair, A., Bayer, A., Rait, G., Rycroft-Malone, J. and Burton, C. 2017. What works for whom in the management of diabetes in people living with dementia: a realist review. BMC Medicine. 15 (141).
Improving skills and care standards in the support workforce for older people: a realist synthesis of workforce development interventions
Rycroft-Malone, J., Burton, C., Williams, L., Edwards, S., Fisher, D., Hall, B., McCormack, B., Nutley, S., Seddon, D. and Williams, R. 2016. Improving skills and care standards in the support workforce for older people: a realist synthesis of workforce development interventions. National Institute of Health Research. doi:10.3310/hsdr04120
Implementing a Systematic Voiding Program for Patients With Urinary Incontinence After Stroke
French, B., Thomas, L.H., Harrison, J., Burton, C., Forshaw, D., Booth, J., Britt, D., Cheater, F.M., Roe, B. and Watkins, C.L. 2016. Implementing a Systematic Voiding Program for Patients With Urinary Incontinence After Stroke. Qualitative Health Research. 26 (10).
Implementing best practice in infection prevention and control. A realist evaluation of the role of intermediaries
Williams, L., Rycroft-Malone, J. and Burton, C. 2016. Implementing best practice in infection prevention and control. A realist evaluation of the role of intermediaries. International Journal of Nursing Studies. 60, pp. 156-167.
Bringing critical realism to nursing practice: Roy Bhaskar's contribution
Williams, L., Rycroft-Malone, J. and Burton, C. 2016. Bringing critical realism to nursing practice: Roy Bhaskar's contribution. nursing philosophy: an international journal for healthcare professionals. 18 (2).
Managers' use of nursing workforce planning and deployment technologies: protocol for a realist synthesis of implementation and impact
Burton, C., Rycroft-Malone, J., Williams, L., Davies, S., McBride, A., Hall, B., Rowlands, A.M. and Jones, A. 2016. Managers' use of nursing workforce planning and deployment technologies: protocol for a realist synthesis of implementation and impact. BMJ Open. 6 (8).
Improving skills and care standards in the support workforce for older people: a realist synthesis of workforce development interventions
Williams, L., Rycroft-Malone, J., Burton, C., Edwards,S., Fisher, D., Hall, B., McCormack, B., Nutley, S.M., Seddon, D. and Williams, R. 2016. Improving skills and care standards in the support workforce for older people: a realist synthesis of workforce development interventions. BMJ Open. 6 (8).
Strategies to prevent oral disease in dependent older people
Brocklehurst, P., Williams, L., Hoare, Z., Goodwin, T., McKenna, G., Tsakos, G., Chestnutt, I.G., Pretty, I., Wassall, R., Jerkovic-Cosic, K., Hayes, M., Watt, R.G. and Burton, C. 2016. Strategies to prevent oral disease in dependent older people. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.
Process evaluations in neurological rehabilitation: a mixed-evidence systematic review and recommendations for future research
Masterson-Algar, P., Burton, C. and Rycroft-Malone, J. 2016. Process evaluations in neurological rehabilitation: a mixed-evidence systematic review and recommendations for future research. BMJ Open. 6 (11).
Managing diabetes in people with dementia: protocol for a realist review
Bunn, F., Goodman, C., Rycroft Malone, J., Reece Jones, P., Burton, C., Rait, G., Trivedi, D., Bayer, A. and Sinclair, A. 2016. Managing diabetes in people with dementia: protocol for a realist review. Systematic Reviews. 5 (5).
Collaboration and co-production knowledge in healthcare: opportunities and challenges
Rycroft-Malone, J., Burton, C.R., Bucknall , T., Graham, I.D., Hutchinson, A. and Stacey, D. 2016. Collaboration and co-production knowledge in healthcare: opportunities and challenges. International Journal of Health Policy and Management. 5 (4), pp. 221-223.
Collective action for implementation: a realist evaluation of organisational collaboration in healthcare
Rycroft-Malone, J., Burton, C.R., Wilkinson, J., Harvey, G., McCormack, B., Baker, R., Dopson, S., Graham, I.D., Staniszewska, S., Thompson, C., Ariss, S., Melville-Richards, L. and Williams , L. 2016. Collective action for implementation: a realist evaluation of organisational collaboration in healthcare. Implementation Science : IS. 11 (17).
An occupational therapy intervention for residents with stroke-related disabilities in UK care homes (OTCH): cluster randomised controlled trial with economic evaluation
Sackley, C.M., Walker, M.F., Burton, C.R., Watkins,C.L, Mant, J., Roalfe, A.K., Wheatley, K., Sheehan, B., Sharp, L., Stant, K.E., Fletcher-Smith, J., Steel, K., Barton, G.R., Irvine, L. and Peryer, G. 2016. An occupational therapy intervention for residents with stroke-related disabilities in UK care homes (OTCH): cluster randomised controlled trial with economic evaluation. Health Technology Assessment. 20 (15).
Identifying Continence OptioNs after Stroke (ICONS): an evidence synthesis, case study and exploratory cluster randomised controlled trial of the introduction of a systematic voiding programme for patients with urinary incontinence after stroke in secondary care
Thomas, L. H., French, B., Sutton, C. J., Forshaw, D., Leathley, M. J., Burton, C., Roe, B., Cheater, F. M., Booth, J., McColl, E., Carter, B., Walker, A., Brittain, K., Whiteley, G., Rodgers, H., Barrett, J. and Watkins, C. L. 2015. Identifying Continence OptioNs after Stroke (ICONS): an evidence synthesis, case study and exploratory cluster randomised controlled trial of the introduction of a systematic voiding programme for patients with urinary incontinence after stroke in secondary care. NIHR Journals Library.
An untapped resource: patient and public involvement in implementation comment on "Knowledge mobilization in healthcare organizations": a view from the resource-based view of the firm
Burton, C. and Rycroft-Malone, J. 2015. An untapped resource: patient and public involvement in implementation comment on "Knowledge mobilization in healthcare organizations": a view from the resource-based view of the firm. International Journal of Health Policy and Management. 4 (12), pp. 845-847.
Investigating preferences for support with life after stroke: a discrete choice experiment
Burton, C., Fargher, E., Plumpton, C., Roberts, G.W, Owen, H. and Roberts, E. 2014. Investigating preferences for support with life after stroke: a discrete choice experiment. BMC Health Services Research. 14 (63).
Evaluating a systematic voiding programme for patients with urinary incontinence after stroke in secondary care using soft systems analysis and Normalisation Process Theory: findings from the ICONS case study phase.International journal of nursing studies
Thomas, L.H, French, B., Burton, C., Sutton, C., Forshaw, D., Dickinson, H., Leathley, M.J., Britt, D., Roe, B., Cheater, F.M, Booth, J., Watkins, C.L, ICONS Project Team, ICONS Patient and Public and Carer Involvement Groups 2014. Evaluating a systematic voiding programme for patients with urinary incontinence after stroke in secondary care using soft systems analysis and Normalisation Process Theory: findings from the ICONS case study phase.International journal of nursing studies. International Journal of Nursing Studies. 51 (10), pp. 1308-1320.
Improving skills and care standards in the support workforce for older people: a realist review
Rycroft-Malone, J., Burton, C., Hall, B., McCormack, B., Nutley, S., Seddon, D. and Williams, L. 2014. Improving skills and care standards in the support workforce for older people: a realist review. BMJ Open. 4 (5).
Does self-efficacy influence recovery and well-being in osteoarthritis patients undergoing joint replacement? A systematic review
Magklara, E., Burton, C. and Morrison, V. 2014. Does self-efficacy influence recovery and well-being in osteoarthritis patients undergoing joint replacement? A systematic review. Clinical Rehabilitation. 28 (9).
Towards a programme theory for fidelity in the evaluation of complex interventions.
Masterson-Algar, P., Burton, C., Rycroft-Malone, J., Sackley, C.M. and Walker, M.F. 2014. Towards a programme theory for fidelity in the evaluation of complex interventions. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice . 20 (4), pp. 445 - 452.
Investigating the organisational impacts of quality improvement: a protocol for a realist evaluation of improvement approaches drawing on the Resource Based View of the Firm.
Burton, C., Rycroft Malone, J., Robert, G., Willson, A. and Hopkins, A. 2014. Investigating the organisational impacts of quality improvement: a protocol for a realist evaluation of improvement approaches drawing on the Resource Based View of the Firm. BMJ Open. 4:e005650.
Resource based view of the firm as a theoretical lens on the organisational consequences of quality improvement.
Burton, C. and Rycroft-Malone, J. 2014. Resource based view of the firm as a theoretical lens on the organisational consequences of quality improvement. International Journal of Health Policy and Management. 3 (3), pp. 113 - 115.
The study protocol of: 'Initiating end of life care in stroke: clinical decision-making around prognosis'.
Burton, C., Payne, S., Turner, M., Bucknall, T., Rycroft-Malone, J., Tyrell, P., Horne, M., Ntambwe, L.I., Tyson, S., Mitchell, H., Williams, S. and Elghenzai, S. 2014. The study protocol of: 'Initiating end of life care in stroke: clinical decision-making around prognosis'. BMC Palliative Care. 13 (55).
Identifying continence options after stroke (ICONS): a cluster randomised controlled feasibility trial.
Thomas, L.H., Watkins, C.L., Sutton, C.J., Forshaw, D., Leathley, M.J., French, B., Burton, C., Cheater, F., Roe, B., Britt, D., Booth, J., McColl, E., The ICONS Project Team and The ICONS Patient, Public and Carer Involvement Groups 2014. Identifying continence options after stroke (ICONS): a cluster randomised controlled feasibility trial. Trials. 15 (509).
What is rehabilitation potential? Development of a theoretical model through the accounts of healthcare professionals working in stroke rehabilitation services
Burton, C.R., Horne, M., Woodward-Nutt, K., Bowen, A. and Tyrrell, P. 2014. What is rehabilitation potential? Development of a theoretical model through the accounts of healthcare professionals working in stroke rehabilitation services. Disability and Rehabilitation. 37 (21), pp. 1955-1960.