Authors' objectives:

To assess the impact of research projects on informed decision-making through the vision of stakeholders and identify key factors for enhancing the use of knowledge and implementation.

Authors' recommendations: This study examines the views of researchers and healthcare decision-makers regarding the impact that research projects on respiratory diseases have had on decision-making.Although these results cannot be strictly generalized to the entirety of funded projects, some conclusions can be drawn: The impact of these research projects on decision-making can be direct (application of a finding or innovation) or indirect, contributing to a complex change in clinical practice orhealthcare organization, together with other contextual factors. A special form of indirect impact is the higher awareness that the research team or its environment gain on the studied problem, enabling ulterior improvements of the care process. This impact can be found in any grouper of the logic model, interviewees’ largely perceiving impact on secondary outcomes and less in assessment for the identification of final outcomes. The channels used to transfer new knowledge to clinical practice are complex. Scientific societies and the ties between researchers and local decision-makers can play a very important role. Specifically, ties between managers and research teams and the general knowledge of their activity has been shown to be effective in applying the research. Overall, researchers perceive the world of management as distant and explicitly acknowledge the limited number of channels to transfer knowledge from research to practice. This contrasts with the real impacts mentioned by healthcare decision-makers which were unknown (or at least not mentioned) to the researchers themselves. On the other hand, in some cases they do not acknowledge that they are responsible for promoting the application of their results. According to researchers, the barriers to applying their results include structural factors, such as the aforementioned scarcity of transfer channels or an insufficiently sensitivemanaging structure, but also the reluctance to change of the clinical community. The Agency’s role in the promotion of research is generally deemed to be useful but often not crucial. Although funding is quantitatively low, its contribution may represent an added stimulus and an opportunity to initiate research work, especially in smaller centers.

Project Status: Completed

URL for project: http://www.gencat.cat/salut/depsan/units/aatrm/pdf/isor_impact_qualitativestudy_cahiaq2011en.pdf

Year Published: 2011

URL for published report: http://www.gencat.cat/salut/depsan/units/aatrm/html/en/dir393/doc13902.html

English language abstract: An English language summary is available

Publication Type: Not Assigned

Country: Spain

Organisation Name: Agencia de Qualitat i Avaluacio Sanitries de Catalunya

Contact Address: Antoni Parada, CAHTA, Roc Boronat, 81-95 (2nd floor), 08005 Barcelona, Spain, Tel. +34 935 513 928, Fax: +34 935 517 510

Contact Name: direccio@aatrm.catsalut.net / aparada@aatrm.catsalut.net

Contact Email: direccio@aatrm.catsalut.net / aparada@aatrm.catsalut.net

Copyright: Catalan Agency for Health Information, Assessment and Quality (CAHIAQ)