Does knowledge brokering improve the quality of rapid review proposals? A before and after study
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Rapid reviews are increasingly being used to help policy makers access research in short time frames. A clear articulation of the review's purpose, questions, scope, methods and reporting format is thought to improve the quality and generalisability of review findings. The aim of the study is to explore the effectiveness of knowledge brokering in improving the perceived clarity of rapid review proposals from the perspective of potential reviewers. To conduct the study, we drew on the Evidence Check program, where policy makers draft a review proposal (a pre knowledge brokering proposal) and have a 1-hour session with a knowledge broker, who re-drafts the proposal based on the discussion (a post knowledge brokering proposal). METHODS: We asked 30 reviewers who had previously undertaken Evidence Check reviews to examine the quality of 60 pre and 60 post knowledge brokering proposals. Reviewers were blind to whether the review proposals they received were pre or post knowledge brokering. Using a six-point Likert scale, reviewers scored six questions examining clarity of information about the review's purpose, questions, scope, method and format and reviewers' confidence that they could meet policy makers' needs. Each reviewer was allocated two pre and two post knowledge brokering proposals, randomly ordered, from the 60 reviews, ensuring no reviewer received a pre and post knowledge brokering proposal from the same review. RESULTS: The results showed that knowledge brokering significantly improved the scores for all six questions addressing the perceived clarity of the review proposal and confidence in meeting policy makers' needs; with average changes of 0.68 to 1.23 from pre to post across the six domains. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that knowledge brokering increased the perceived clarity of information provided in Evidence Check rapid review proposals and the confidence of reviewers that they could meet policy makers' needs. Further research is needed to identify how the knowledge brokering process achieves these improvements and to test the applicability of the findings in other rapid review programs.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
One study found that knowledge brokering of proposals improved policymakers' perceived clarity of information, reasons for commissioning the rapid review, context for questions, scope, methods, and report conclusions, and reviewers' confidence in meeting policymakers' needs.
“Evidence from one study suggests that knowledge brokering of proposals improved the perceived clarity of information provided to policymakers; reasons for commissioning the RR; and context for the questions, scope, methods, and report conclusions. Further, it improved the confidence of reviewers to meet the policymakers’ needs [27].”
From Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group offers evidence-informed guidance to conduct rapid reviews (2021) · cites this paper as [27]
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
PRISMA-P Group, Moher, D., Shamseer, L., Clarke, M., Ghersi, D., Liberati, A., Petticrew, M., Shekelle, P., & Stewart, L. A. (2015) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/2046-4053-4-1 · Cited by 26,223 · see citing works
Goldstein, H. (2006) · Technometrics · doi:10.1198/tech.2006.s417 · Cited by 4,960 · see citing works
Courgeau, D., & Goldstein, H. (1997) · Population · doi:10.2307/1534624 · Cited by 2,590 · see citing works
A systematic review of barriers to and facilitators of the use of evidence by policymakers
Oliver, K. A., Innvær, S., Lorenc, T., Woodman, J., & Thomas, J. (2014) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/1472-6963-14-2 · Cited by 1,374 · see citing works
Evidence summaries: the evolution of a rapid review approach
Khangura, S., Konnyu, K., Cushman, R., Grimshaw, J., & Moher, D. (2012) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/2046-4053-1-10 · Cited by 1,232 · see citing works
The Corsini encyclopedia of psychology
(2010) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.47-6008 · Cited by 1,082 · see citing works
Ottawa Hospital Research Institute
Bouhassira, E. E. (2015) · Sage eBooks · doi:10.4135/9781483347660.n335 · Cited by 851 · see citing works
Kontos, P. C., & Poland, B. D. (2009) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-4-1 · Cited by 760 · see citing works
Expediting systematic reviews: methods and implications of rapid reviews
Ganann, R., Ciliska, D., & Thomas, H. (2010) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-5-56 · Cited by 752 · see citing works
Bridges, brokers and boundary spanners in collaborative networks: a systematic review
Long, J. C., Cunningham, F. C., & Braithwaite, J. (2013) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/1472-6963-13-158 · Cited by 523 · see citing works
Dobbins, M., Robeson, P., Ciliska, D. K., Hanna, S., Cameron, R., O’Mara, L., DeCorby, K., & Mercer, S. L. (2009) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-4-23 · Cited by 396 · see citing works
Agyeman-Duah, J. N. A., Theurer, A., Munthali, C., Alide, N., & Neuhann, F. (2014) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/1472-6963-14-1 · Cited by 345 · see citing works
Kastner, M., Tricco, A. C., Soobiah, C., Lillie, E., Perrier, L., Horsley, T., Welch, V., Cogo, E., Antony, J., & Straus, S. E. (2012) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-12-114 · Cited by 345 · see citing works
A randomized controlled trial evaluating the impact of knowledge translation and exchange strategies
Dobbins, M., Hanna, S., Ciliska, D. K., Manske, S., Cameron, R., Mercer, S. L., O’Mara, L., DeCorby, K., & Robeson, P. (2009) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-4-61 · Cited by 322 · see citing works
Bornbaum, C. C., Kornas, K., Peirson, L., & Rosella, L. C. (2015) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-015-0351-9 · Cited by 301 · see citing works
The effectiveness of knowledge translation strategies used in public health: a systematic review
LaRocca, R. L., Yost, J., Dobbins, M., Ciliska, D. K., & Butt, M. L. (2012) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/1471-2458-12-751 · Cited by 299 · see citing works
KORA Study Group, Hunger, M., Schwarzkopf, L., Heier, M., Peters, A., & Holle, R. (2013) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/1472-6963-13-1 · Cited by 261 · see citing works
Increasing the use of evidence in health policy: practice and views of policy makers and researchers
Campbell, D., Redman, S., Rychetnik, L., Cooke, M., Zwi, A. B., & Jorm, L. R. (2009) · Australia and New Zealand Health Policy · doi:10.1071/hp090621 · Cited by 235 · see citing works
Self-citationUnited States Department Of Veterans Affairs.
Baker, R. R. (2000) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1037/10523-059 · Cited by 235 · see citing works
Drobac, P. C., Basinga, P., Condo, J. U., Farmer, P. E., Finnegan, K. E., Hamon, J. K., Amoroso, C. L., Hirschhorn, L. R., Kakoma, J. B., Lu, C., et al. (2013) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/1472-6963-13-s2-s5 · Cited by 185 · see citing works
Gama, E. M., Madan, J. J., Banda, H., Squire, S. B., Thomson, R., & Namakhoma, I. (2015) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-014-0195-8 · Cited by 155 · see citing works
Moat, K. A., Lavis, J. N., & Abelson, J. (2013) · Milbank Quarterly · doi:10.1111/1468-0009.12026 · Cited by 143 · see citing works
Featherstone, R. M., Dryden, D. M., Foisy, M., Guise, J.-M., Mitchell, M. D., Paynter, R. A., Robinson, K. A., Umscheid, C. A., & Hartling, L. (2015) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/s13643-015-0040-4 · Cited by 140 · see citing works
Rabe‐Hesketh, S., & Skrondal, A. (2012) · Cited by 128 · see citing works
Ellen, M., Léon, G., Bouchard, G., Ouimet, M., Grimshaw, J., & Lavis, J. N. (2014) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-014-0179-8 · Cited by 124 · see citing works
Rapid evidence assessments of research to inform social policy: taking stock and moving forward
Thomas, J., Newman, M., & Oliver, S. (2013) · Evidence and Policy · doi:10.1332/174426413x662572 · Cited by 109 · see citing works
Knowledge brokering in public health: a tale of two studies
Traynor, R. L., DeCorby, K., & Dobbins, M. (2014) · Public Health · doi:10.1016/j.puhe.2014.01.015 · Cited by 80 · see citing works
The production of quick scoping reviews and rapid evidence assessments: a how to guide
Collins, A. F., Coughlin, D., Miller, J., & Kirk, S. A. (2015) · NERC Open Research Archive (Natural Environment Research Council) · Cited by 80 · see citing works
Pritzlaff, T., & Nullmeier, F. (2011) · Evidence & Policy · doi:10.1332/174426411x579199 · Cited by 73 · see citing works
Waltz, T. J., Powell, B. J., Matthieu, M. M., Chinman, M., Smith, J. L., Proctor, E. K., Damschroder, L. J., & Kirchner, J. E. (2015) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-10-s1-a44 · Cited by 67 · see citing works
Knowledge brokering in public health: A critical analysis of the results of a qualitative evaluation
Dagenais, C., Laurendeau, M., & Briand-Lamarche, M. (2015) · Evaluation and Program Planning · doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2015.07.003 · Cited by 54 · see citing works
Hammami, H., Amara, N., & Landry, R. (2013) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2012.07.008 · Cited by 49 · see citing works
Evidence Check: knowledge brokering to commission research reviews for policy
Campbell, D., Donald, B., Moore, G., & Frew, D. (2011) · Evidence & Policy · doi:10.1332/174426411x553034 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
Self-citationMakkar, S. R., Turner, T., Williamson, A. B., Louviere, J. J., Redman, S., Haynes, A. S., Green, S., & Brennan, S. (2015) · Health Research Policy and Systems · doi:10.1186/s12961-015-0069-9 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
Self-citationPeterson, K., Floyd, N., Ferguson, L., Christensen, V., & Helfand, M. (2016) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/s13643-016-0306-5 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
Reflections on Knowledge Brokering Within a Multidisciplinary Research Team
Urquhart, R., Porter, G. A., & Grunfeld, E. (2011) · Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions · doi:10.1002/chp.20128 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Frost, H., Geddes, R., Haw, S. J., et al. (2012) · Evidence & Policy · doi:10.1332/174426412x654068 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Wilson, M. G., Lavis, J. N., & Gauvin, F.-P. (2015) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/s13643-015-0009-3 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Meagher, L. R., & Lyall, C. (2013) · Evidence & Policy · doi:10.1332/174426413x14818994998468 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
de Goede, J., van Bon-Martens, M. J., Mathijssen, J. J. P., Putters, K., & van Oers, H. (2012) · Health Research Policy and Systems · doi:10.1186/1478-4505-10-9 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Can financial carrots improve health?
Oliver, A., Marteau, T. M., & Ashcroft, R. E. (2008) · Journal of Health Services Research & Policy · doi:10.1258/jhsrp.2008.008132 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Ellen, M., Lavis, J. N., Wilson, M. G., et al. (2014) · Evidence & Policy · doi:10.1332/174426514x672362 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
Moore, G., Redman, S., Turner, T., et al. (2015) · Evidence & Policy · doi:10.1332/174426415x14446635524057 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Self-citationIncreasing the influence of one’s research on policy
Dwan, K., & McInnes, P. (2013) · Australian Health Review · doi:10.1071/ah12158 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
The Effectiveness of Knowledge Translation Strategies in Public Health
LaRocca, R. L. (2011) · MacSphere (McMaster University) · doi:10.71548/10664 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- [41]Rabe-Hesketh S Skrondal A Multilevel and Longitudinal Modeling Using Stata Third Edition Volume I: Continuous Responses. edn 2012 Texas Stata Press
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group offers evidence-informed guidance to conduct rapid reviews
Garritty, C., Gartlehner, G., Nussbaumer-Streit, B., King, V. J., Hamel, C., Kamel, C., Affengruber, L., & Stevens, A. (2021) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.10.007 · Cited by 1,141 · see citing works
Hamel, C., Michaud, A., Thuku, M., Affengruber, L., Skidmore, B., Nussbaumer-Streit, B., Stevens, A., & Garritty, C. (2020) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.06.027 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Garritty, C., Hamel, C., Hersi, M., Butler, C., Monfaredi, Z., Stevens, A., Nussbaumer-Streit, B., Cheng, W., & Moher, D. (2020) · Health Research Policy and Systems · doi:10.1186/s12961-020-00624-7 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
- Authors
- Moore, G., Redman, S., D’Este, C., Makkar, S., & Turner, T.
- Affiliations
- The University of Sydney (AU)
- Sax Institute (AU)
- Australian National University (AU)
- Monash University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Moore, Gabriel
- Venue
- Systematic Reviews
- Published
- 2017-01-28
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 23-23
- ISSN
- 2046-4053 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC5273818
- OpenAlex
- W2582869819
- Cited by
- 28
- References
- 45
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 2
- FWCI
- 7.95
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Systematic Reviews (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- ANU Open Research (Australian National University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- National Health and Medical Research Council (573122)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Sciences Research and Education
- Keywords
- knowledge brokering, rapid review, policy makers, evidence-informed policy, pre-post test comparison
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Policy Making, Review Literature as Topic, Evidence-Based Medicine, Controlled Before-After Studies
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
