Skip to main content

Table 3 Views about emerging development of supports for EIDM

From: Barriers, facilitators and views about next steps to implementing supports for evidence-informed decision-making in health systems: a qualitative study

Support for evidence-informed decision-making

Number of interview participants (n)a

Total (n  = 57)

Organizationb

Province

Occupation

PCP (n  = 9)

Hospital (n  = 32)

RHA (n  = 16)

Ontario (n  = 29)

Quebec (n  = 28)

Senior manager (n  = 33)

Knowledge broker (n  = 11)

Library manager (n  = 13)

Facilitating pull efforts

25

4

14

7

8

17

11

6

8

-Implement accessible and efficient systems to support the use of research in decision-makingc

14

4

6

4

6

8

9

2

3

-Implement technical infrastructure to support research use and to ensure no restrictions are placed on staff’s access to online resources that contain relevant research evidence

12

1

10

1

4

8

3

3

6

-Provide easy access to journals and scientific literature either through bulk purchasing of subscriptions or promoting open-access resourcesd

10

1

6

3

2

8

4

1

5

Climate for research use

19

2

14

3

8

11

13

3

3

-Develop and implement an infrastructure or positions where the accountability for encouraging knowledge use liese

13

0

10

3

5

8

7

3

3

Pull efforts

16

2

10

4

8

8

7

7

2

-Enable training and continuing education that focus on finding and using research evidence in decision-making

8

1

6

1

3

5

5

1

2

-Ensure decision-making processes promote the use of research in decision-making

7

1

5

1

4

3

3

3

1

Linkage and exchange efforts

14

3

7

4

6

8

8

2

4

-Establish formal and informal ties to researchers and knowledge brokers outside the organization who can assist in integrating evidence into decision-makingf

13

3

6

4

5

8

8

2

3

Push efforts

14

0

10

4

3

11

5

3

6

-Use a knowledge intelligence service that scans the literature and distributes research evidence throughout the organizationg

11

0

7

4

2

9

4

1

6

Research production efforts

9

2

6

1

3

6

5

4

0

Evaluation of efforts to link research to action

7

1

3

3

2

5

3

3

1

  1. aPercentage of total number of participants (font style used): 0% of participants (bold); 1% to 32% of participants (italic); 33% to 66% of participants (regular i.e. not bold and not italic); 67% to 99% of participants (bold and italic); 100% of participants (regular and underlined).
  2. b PCP primary care practice, RHA regional health authority.
  3. cThe main two sub-elements that were mentioned within the category of ‘Implement accessible and efficient systems to support the use of research in decision-making’ were: decision support tools (n = 8) and documentation and reporting tools (n = 8).
  4. dThe main sub-element that was mentioned within the category of ‘Provide easy access to journals and scientific literature’ was: electronic-based resources i.e. bibliographic databases (n = 6).
  5. eThe main sub-element that was mentioned within the category of ‘Develop and implement an infrastructure or positions where the accountability for encouraging knowledge use lies’ was: department or section dedicated to KT (n = 5).
  6. fThe main sub-element that was mentioned within the category of ‘Establish formal and informal ties to researchers and knowledge brokers’ was: being part of group outside the institution (n = 9).
  7. gThe main sub-element that was mentioned within the category of ‘Use a knowledge intelligence…’ was: information monitoring services (n = 7).
Back to article page

Implementation Science

ISSN: 1748-5908