The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Developing a Framework for Transferring Knowledge Into Action: A Thematic Analysis of the Literature
Open accessAbstract
Objectives: Although there is widespread agreement about the importance of transferring knowledge into action, we still lack high quality information about what works, in which settings and with whom. While there are a large number of models and theories for knowledge transfer interventions, the majority are untested, meaning that their applicability and relevance is largely unknown. This paper describes the development of a conceptual framework of translating knowledge into action and discusses how it can be used for developing a useful model of the knowledge transfer process. Methods: A narrative review of the knowledge transfer literature identified 28 different models which explained all or part of the knowledge transfer process. The models were subjected to a thematic analysis to identify individual components and the types of processes used when transferring knowledge into action. The results were used to build a conceptual framework of the process. Results: Five common components of the knowledge transfer process were identified: problem identification and communication; knowledge/research development and selection; analysis of context; knowledge transfer activities or interventions; and knowledge/research utilization. We also identified three types of knowledge transfer processes: a linear process; a cyclical process; and a dynamic multidirectional process. From these results a conceptual framework of knowledge transfer was developed. The framework illustrates the five common components of the knowledge transfer process and shows that they are connected via a complex, multidirectional set of interactions. As such the framework allows for the individual components to occur simultaneously or in any given order and to occur more than once during the knowledge transfer process. Conclusion: Our framework provides a foundation for gathering evidence from case studies of knowledge transfer interventions. We propose that future empirical work is designed to test and refine the relevance, importance and applicability of each of the components in order to build a more useful model of knowledge transfer which can serve as a practical checklist for planning or evaluating knowledge transfer activities.
Overview
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
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“A number of literature reviews of implementation frameworks have also been conducted, concentrating on particular implementation concepts, such as a particular stage, or specifically on either the factors, strategies or evaluations, rather than addressing all the concepts that could affect an innovation’s implementation [13,17,19-26].”
From A systematic review of implementation frameworks of innovations in healthcare and resulting generic implementation framework (2015) · cites this paper as [22]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Rogers, E. M., Singhal, A., & Quinlan, M. M. (2019) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203710753-35 · Cited by 37,670
Valente, T. W. (2003) · Genetics in Medicine · doi:10.1097/01.gim.0000061743.67794.c4 · Cited by 20,559
Diffusion of Innovations in Service Organizations: Systematic Review and Recommendations
GREENHALGH, T., ROBERT, G., MACFARLANE, F., BATE, P., & KYRIAKIDOU, O. (2004) · The Milbank Quarterly · doi:10.1111/j.0887-378x.2004.00325.x · Cited by 7,448
Lost in knowledge translation: Time for a map?
Graham, I. D., Logan, J., Harrison, M. B., Straus, S. E., Tetroe, J., Caswell, W., & Robinson, N. (2006) · Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions · doi:10.1002/chp.47 · Cited by 4,705
Effectiveness and efficiency of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies
Grimshaw, J., Thomas, R., MacLennan, G., Fraser, C., Ramsay, C., Vale, L., Whitty, P., Eccles, M., Matowe, L., Shirran, L., et al. (2004) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta8060 · Cited by 3,044
Disseminating Innovations in Health Care
Berwick, D. M. (2003) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.289.15.1969 · Cited by 1,878
Pawson, R. (2006) · doi:10.4135/9781849209120 · Cited by 1,791
van de Ven, & Haines, A. (1999) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 1,421
Mays, N., Pope, C. J., & Popay, J. (2005) · Journal of Health Services Research & Policy · doi:10.1258/1355819054308576 · Cited by 1,384
Kitson, A. L., Rycroft-Malone, J., Harvey, G., McCormack, B., Seers, K., & Titchen, A. (2008) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-3-1 · Cited by 1,314
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- Darzi A, 2007, Our NHS, Our Future: NHS next stage review interim report.
- 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2007.tb02369.x · DOI
- Havelock RG., 1969, Planning for Innovation: A Comparative Study of the Literature on the Dissemination and Utilization of Scientific Knowledge
- Nieva V, 2005, Advances in Patient Safety, 2
- Oldham G, 1997, Approaches to Knowledge-Brokering
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines
Snyder, H. (2019) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039 · Cited by 11,524
The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research
Morris, Z. S., Wooding, S., & Grant, J. (2011) · Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · doi:10.1258/jrsm.2011.110180 · Cited by 3,340
Bridging Research and Practice
Tabak, R. G., Khoong, E. C., Chambers, D. A., & Brownson, R. C. (2012) · American Journal of Preventive Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2012.05.024 · Cited by 1,386
The social and psychological impact of endometriosis on women's lives: a critical narrative review
Culley, L. A., Law, C., Hudson, N., Denny, E., Mitchell, H., Baumgarten, M. N., & Raine‐Fenning, N. (2013) · Human Reproduction Update · doi:10.1093/humupd/dmt027 · Cited by 732
Is it time to drop the ‘knowledge translation’ metaphor? A critical literature review
Greenhalgh, T., & Wieringa, S. (2011) · Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · doi:10.1258/jrsm.2011.110285 · Cited by 583
Metadata
- Authors
- Ward, V., House, A., & Hamer, S.
- Affiliations
- University of Leeds (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Ward, Vicky
- Venue
- Journal of Health Services Research & Policy
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2009-07
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 156-164
- ISSN
- 1355-8196 (ISSN-L)
- 1758-1060
- PMC
- PMC2933505
- OpenAlex
- W2094227722
- Cited by
- 511
- References
- 31
- Citations by year
- 2026: 22 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 37 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 52 · 2020: 44 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 30 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 31 · 2014: 31 · 2013: 40 · 2012: 25
- FWCI
- 3.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Journal of Health Services Research & Policy (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Sciences Research and Education
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › Research, Science, and Academia
- Keywords
- knowledge transfer, knowledge translation, conceptual framework, knowledge application, contextual analysis, problem identification, evidence-based practice
- MeSH terms
- Diffusion of Innovation, Documentation, Humans, Models, Theoretical, Evidence-Based Medicine, Knowledge, Biomedical Research
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
