Knowledge Utilization (knowledge + utilization)

Distribution by Scientific Domains


Selected Abstracts


Knowledge utilization: Implications for evaluation

NEW DIRECTIONS FOR EVALUATION, Issue 124 2009
Sarah C. Blake
Knowledge utilization is a field crossing many sectors, from agriculture, since the 1920s, to health care today. Evaluators have made long-standing contributions to understanding knowledge utilization. Different models or ways to think about knowledge utilization have evolved to reflect different perspectives, contexts, and stages of the process, from knowledge creation to the use of effectiveness results in policymaking. The rich interdisciplinary history of this field challenges evaluators to interrogate what knowledge (really) means within a policy or program,whether knowledge is being used more symbolically, rhetorically, or tactically, for example. Differences in program or policy effectiveness across different program sites might result from different types of knowledge use in those sites. Wiley Periodicals, Inc., and the American Evaluation Association. [source]


Evidence-based practice and the professionalization of dental hygiene

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF DENTAL HYGIENE, Issue 4 2004
Sandra J Cobban
Abstract: The application of knowledge is fundamental to human problem solving. In health disciplines, knowledge utilization commonly manifests through evidence-based decision making in practice. The purpose of this paper is to explore the development of the evidence-based practice (EBP) movement in health professions in general, and dental hygiene in particular, and to examine its relationship to the professionalization agenda of dental hygiene in Canada. EBP means integrating practitioner expertise with the best available external evidence from research. Proponents of EBP believe that it holds promise for reducing a research,practice gap by encouraging clinicians to seek current research results. Both the Canadian and American Dental Hygienists Associations support practice based on current research evidence, yet recent studies show variation in practice. Professionalization refers to the developmental stages through which an organized occupation passes as it develops traits that characterize it as a profession. The status conferred by professionalization privileges a group to make and monitor its own decisions relative to practice. Dental hygiene's success in acquiring attributes of a profession suggests that transformation to a profession is occurring. This paper compares the assumptions and challenges of both movements, and argues the need for a principal focus on the development of a culture of evidence-based dental hygiene practice. [source]


Knowledge utilization: Implications for evaluation

NEW DIRECTIONS FOR EVALUATION, Issue 124 2009
Sarah C. Blake
Knowledge utilization is a field crossing many sectors, from agriculture, since the 1920s, to health care today. Evaluators have made long-standing contributions to understanding knowledge utilization. Different models or ways to think about knowledge utilization have evolved to reflect different perspectives, contexts, and stages of the process, from knowledge creation to the use of effectiveness results in policymaking. The rich interdisciplinary history of this field challenges evaluators to interrogate what knowledge (really) means within a policy or program,whether knowledge is being used more symbolically, rhetorically, or tactically, for example. Differences in program or policy effectiveness across different program sites might result from different types of knowledge use in those sites. Wiley Periodicals, Inc., and the American Evaluation Association. [source]


Rapid knowledge: ,Bridging research and policy' at the Overseas Development Institute,

PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION & DEVELOPMENT, Issue 4 2009
Diane Stone
Abstract Numerous organizations advocate the need to ,bridge research and policy'. Philanthropic foundations, national social science funding regimes and international organizations have sought to improve knowledge utilization. Similarly, research consumers such as NGOs and government departments complain of research irrelevance for policy purposes. The concern of this article is with ,evidence informed policy' within the field of international development in which the Overseas Development Institute (ODI), a London-based think tank, forms the case study. Most think tanks are driven by the need to influence immediate political agendas but ODI has also developed organizational strategies of policy entrepreneurship that extend to longer term influence through creating human capital, building networks and engaging policy communities. Copyright 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source]


Stakeholder engagement opportunities in systematic reviews: Knowledge transfer for policy and practice

THE JOURNAL OF CONTINUING EDUCATION IN THE HEALTH PROFESSIONS, Issue 2 2008
Kiera Keown MSc
Abstract Knowledge transfer and exchange is the process of increasing the awareness and use of research evidence in policy or practice decision making by nonresearch audiences or stakeholders. One way to accomplish this end is through ongoing interaction between researchers and interested nonresearch audiences, which provides an opportunity for the two groups to learn more about one another. The purpose of this article is to describe and discuss various stakeholder engagement opportunities that we employ throughout the stages of conducting a systematic review, to increase knowledge utilization within these audiences. Systematic reviews of the literature on a particular topic can provide an unbiased overview of the state of the literature. The engagement opportunities we have identified are topic consultation, feedback meetings during the review, member of review team, and involvement in dissemination. The potential benefits of including stakeholders in the process of a systematic review include increased relevance, clarity, and awareness of systematic review findings. A further benefit is the potential for increased dissemination of the findings. Challenges that researchers face are that stakeholder interactions can be time- and resource-intensive, it can be difficult balancing stakeholder desires with scientific rigor, and stakeholders may have difficulties accepting findings with which they do not agree. Despite these challenges we have included stakeholder involvement as a permanent step in the procedure of conducting a systematic review. [source]