Eysenbach (2006) hypothesized about “a knowledge translation advantage”:

Our data do suggest that OA articles are more quickly recognized and their results are picked up and discussed by peers to a larger extent. It is hard to see how faster and increased utilization and uptake of research results will not benefit science, at least in terms of accelerating the speed by which new results are verified, falsified, or built upon by others. By focusing on citations this study only addresses the impact on other research users, not on the knowledge user (i.e., policymakers, consumers, or health professionals), but it can be hypothesized (and should be tested in future studies) that there is also a “knowledge translation advantage” in terms of increased and accelerated knowledge uptake by consumers and policymakers.

Eysenbach G (2006) Citation Advantage of Open Access Articles. PLoS Biol 4(5): e157

I’ve been thinking about the connection between open access and knowledge translation. How will OA benefit KT? Well, here is my first attempt to answer that question:

• Open access enables wider circulation of knowledge compared to the traditional publishing model, by removing the price barrier and permission barrier. This means members of the public can read evidence from publicly funded research from any Internet-connected computer (be it at their homes or workplaces). Not only they have access to the online materials, but they have access to the most recent evidence as true open access brings scholarly publications online without delay. When a policy or regulation is introduced to the public, it should be easier for the public (including journalists) to check the degree of which the policymakers use research evidence in their decision making. There will still be the challenge to translate research evidence to the lay people, but that is the next step. Besides, I think we should not underestimate people’s learning capability.
• Eysenbach pointed out the tendency of policymakers, consumers, and journalists to use Google when looking for evidence. The artificial scarcity problem they encounter as their search retrieves links to publications they cannot access defers them from reading the evidence. However, when the links lead them to open access publications, they are most likely to skim and even read through the papers. This rings true to me as I found his paper via Google.
• According to CIHR, researchers are also expected to publish research findings in plain language and accessible formats. Wouldn’t it help their job if they can easily provide links to the actual research papers – and know that the readers (the public and policymakers) are able to actually access the full text of these research evidence? It serves as an education means to the people who fund their research.

So here’s an example, go click the link below and see my evidence (it’s an editorial not a peer-review article, but for the sake of illustration it should work).

Reference

Eysenbach, G. (2006). The Open Access Advantage. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 8(2), e8. Retrieved July 20, 2007, from http://www.jmir.org/2006/2/e8/

Someone at work pointed this out to me. Jeremy Grinshaw’s presentation at the CHLA 2007 contains a useful list of different terms people use for Knowledge Translation:

• applied health research
• capacity building
• co-optation – cooperation – competing
• diffusion
• dissemination
• getting knowledge into practice
• impact
• Implementation
• knowledge communication
• knowledge cycle
• knowledge exchange
• knowledge management
• knowledge translation
• knowledge mobilization
• knowledge transfer
• linkage and exchange
• popularization of research
• research into practice
• research mediation
• research transfer
• research translation
• science communication
• teaching
• “third mission”
• translational research
• transmission
• utilization

Some of them sound familiar to me, but some others don’t. Can you add to the list?

This post introduced me to the term infodemiology. What would be a health librarian’s role in infodemiology?

Health librarians’ take on KT at the CHLA 2007 Conference:

• Knowledge Infrastructure for KT (ppt) by Jeremy Grimshaw
• Reform, choice and well-being: implications of global knowledge transfer on the roles of 21st century knowledge workers (ppt) by Anne Brice
• Nameless Librarian: Are You Going to Lead the Hospital CEO to the Evidence? (ppt) by Mary McDiarmid, MISt, AHIP, Sandra Kendall, BA, MLS, Malcolm Binns
• Healthcare managers’ decision making: what information do they need and use? (ppt) by Jackie MacDonald
• The Power of tailored messaging: Preliminary results from Canada’s first knowledge brokering trial (ppt) by Maureen Dobbins, Kara DeCorby, Paula Robeson, Donna Ciliska, Helen Thomas, Steve Hanna, Shawna L. Mercer, Stephen R. Manske, Roy Cameron, Linda O’Mara, Christina Mills
• Building Leadership Capital: A Nurse-Librarian Knowledge
  Transfer Partnership (ppt) by Patricia Barrett and Analyn Cohen-Baker, Laurie Blanchard, Lisa Demczuk, Lori Giles-Smith, Tania Gottschalk, Kerry Macdonald, Angela Osterreicher, Melissa Raynard, Christine Shaw-Daigle
• The evolution of the Seniors Health Research Transfer Network Library Project by Shannon Buckley, Nancy Roberts

Abstracts of the presentations are here and here.

That’s one thing David Weinberger reminded me about when I watched his lecture at Google the other day. Can I do that with this blog?