Cited by 45Health Sciences Research and EducationHealth Policy Implementation ScienceClinical practice guidelines implementation

Understanding context in knowledge translation: a concept analysis study protocol

Open access
Squires, Janet E., Graham, Ian D., Hutchinson, Alison M., Linklater, Stefanie, Brehaut, Jamie C., Curran, Janet, Ivers, Noah, Lavis, John N. +7 more·2015·Journal of Advanced Nursing

Abstract

Aim: To conduct a concept analysis of clinical practice contexts (work environments) that facilitate or militate against the uptake of research evidence by healthcare professionals in clinical practice. This will involve developing a clear definition of context by describing its features, domains and defining characteristics. Background: The context where clinical care is delivered influences that care. While research shows that context is important to knowledge translation (implementation), we lack conceptual clarity on what is context, which contextual factors probably modify the effect of knowledge translation interventions (and hence should be considered when designing interventions) and which contextual factors themselves could be targeted as part of a knowledge translation intervention (context modification). Design: Concept analysis. Methods: The Walker and Avant concept analysis method, comprised of eight systematic steps, will be used: (1) concept selection; (2) determination of aims; (3) identification of uses of context; (4) determination of defining attributes of context; (5) identification/construction of a model case of context; (6) identification/construction of additional cases of context; (7) identification/construction of antecedents and consequences of context; and (8) definition of empirical referents of context. This study is funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (January 2014). Discussion: This study will result in a much needed framework of context for knowledge translation, which identifies specific elements that, if assessed and used to tailor knowledge translation activities, will result in increased research use by nurses and other healthcare professionals in clinical practice, ultimately leading to better patient care.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jan.12574

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Fleuren M., Wiefferink K. & Paulussen T. (2004) Determinants of innovation within healthcare organizations. International Journal for Quality in Health Care 16, 107-123.
  2. Hutchinson A.M., Mallidou A.A., Toth F., Cummings G.G., Schalm C. & Estabrooks C.A. (2010) Review and Synthesis of Literature Examining Characteristics of Organizational Context that Influence Knowledge Translation in Healthcare: Technical Report Edmonton. University of Alberta, Faculty of Nursing, Alberta.
  3. Knafl K. & Deatrick J. (2000) Knowledge synthesis and concept development in nursing. In Concept Development in Nursing: Foundations, Techniques and Applications, 2nd edn (Eoyang T., ed.), Saunders, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 39-54.
  4. Rafael A.R.F. (2000) Evidence-based Practice: the good, the bad, the ugly, part 1. Registered Nurses Journal 12(5-6), 9.
  5. Nagel, Stuart. Encyclopedia of Policy Studies, 2nd edn. M. Dekker, New York. pp. 69-92.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Squires, J. E., Graham, I. D., Hutchinson, A. M., Linklater, S., Brehaut, J. C., Curran, J., Ivers, N., Lavis, J. N., Michie, S., Sales, A. E., Fiander, M., Fenton, S., Noseworthy, T., Vine, J., & Grimshaw, J. M.
Affiliations
  • University of Ottawa (CA)
  • Deakin University (AU)
  • Ottawa Hospital Research Institute (CA)
  • Dalhousie University (CA)
  • Women's College Hospital (CA)
  • McMaster University (CA)
  • University College London (GB)
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • George & Fay Yee Centre for Healthcare Innovation (CA)
  • Ministry of Health and Long Term Care (CA)
  • Alberta Health Services (CA)
  • Izaak Walton Killam Health Centre (CA)
Corresponding author
Squires, Janet E.
Venue
Journal of Advanced Nursing
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-11-28
Volume
71
Issue
5
Pages
1146-1155
ISSN
  • 0309-2402 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2648
OpenAlex
W1984197407
Cited by
45
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2
FWCI
4.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Advanced Nursing (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (submittedVersion)
  • Deakin Research Online (Deakin University) (submittedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Operating Grant-Priority Announcement: Knowledge Translation (201309KTE-319843-KTR-CECA-169494)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Sciences Research and Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
Keywords
knowledge translation, context, work environment, research uptake, evidence-based practice, knowledge translation intervention, healthcare workers, nurses
MeSH terms
Heuristics, Canada, Translational Research, Biomedical

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review