Promoting the Use of Research Results: the experience of the Canadian Coalition for Global Health Research Panel on: “Use of Research Results in Policy.

Promoting the Use of Research Results:the experience of the Canadian Coalition

for Global Health Research

Panel on:

“Use of Research Results in Policy Decision-making, Formulation and Implementation in

Health Sectors”

Vic Neufeld

22 August 2006

Presentation Plan

• Introducing the CCGHR

• The “Summer Institute”: an example of capacity building for knowledge use

- what it is

- what we do

- examples of knowledge use

- outcomes; lessons; challenges

Introducing the CCGHR (1)

Who we are: • a not-for-profit organization (created in 2003) • 700 + members (40% other than Canadian) • Goal: To increase Canada’s investment and

involvement in “global health research” • Board of Directors; Secretariat (in Ottawa) • Task Groups (n=7); examples:

- TG on Capacity Building- TG on ‘Research to Action”

Introducing the CCGHR (2)

What we do: • Mobilizing support (advocacy) • Capacity building through “south-Canada”

partnerships - Examples:

- the “Summer Institute for new global health researchers”

- TG on “Building Partnerships” (tools, services)

• Special focus on Research to Action

The Summer Institute (1)

Objectives:

• Explore the “research to action” challenge and apply this to specific project(s)

• Increase understanding of global forces that impact on health

• Competency development (e.g.-advocacy, leadership, partnership building, knowledge translation)

• Career development [for “new” global health researchers”]

The Summer Institute (2)Learning strategies & methods:

• Pre-Institute preparation (e-dialogue, readings, introductions-- on website)

• Work in “dyads” - a Canadian with a ‘partner’ from a low & middle-income country [LMIC]

- 20 - 24 participants (10-12 dyads) per institute

• Develop a “research to action” plan for specific project, with the help of a facilitator

• Presentations, workshops, field trips

• “Alumni” program

The Summer Institute (3)

Locations:

• SI-1: Halifax, CANADA • SI-2: Ifakara Health & Development

Research Centre, TANZANIA [participants from: Benin, Ethiopia, Ghana, Tanzania, Uganda, S.Africa, Zambia + Canada]

• SI-3: Instituto Nacional de Salud Publica (INSP), Cuernavaca, MEXICO [participants from:

Bolivia, India, Mongolia, Nicaragua, Palestine, Uganda, Zambia + Canada]

Examples of Knowledge Use (1)Country: UGANDA [SI-2]

Project: Injuries in Ugandan children

Key research findings (knowledge):

• High proportion of motor vehicle accidents involve children who are pedestrians;

• Specific interventions make a difference (e.g. reflectors on clothing, school-based education programs, working with taxi drivers, etc.]

Research to Action ‘target(s)’:

• Ministries of Health, Education, Transport

• Schools, Police, Taxi companies & associations

Examples of Knowledge Use (2)

Country: INDIA [SI-3]Project: Access to health care and basic minimum

services in Kerala Key Research Findings (knowledge): • information about health status, health care access,

determinants, inequalitiesResearch to Action ‘target(s)’:• local government (“panchayat”) members; NGOs• local health staff; state planning department• local academic institutions

Examples of Knowledge Use (3)Country: NICARAGUA [SI-3)

Project: Building a “knowledge network” (consortium) in Nicaragua, featuring participatory action research

Key research findings to date:

Readiness by health research institutions (universities in both countries), civil society organizations (NGOs) and the Ministry of Health to work together

Research to action ‘target(s):

• the institutions and organizations (above)

• an actual ‘consortium’ organization (to be determined)

Outcomes to Date• Researchers with new competencies about

‘knowledge translation’ (n = 64)

• A resource library (web-based)

• Project-specific research to action plans (some of which have been implemented)

• An “SI Alumni” program

• Involvement of ‘SI alumni’ in other CCGHR activities; and in own institutions & countries

• Increased awareness (and involvement) of funding agencies re: knowledge translation

Lessons Learned• Most researchers do not have competencies

related to knowledge translation (“research to action”);

• A short (1 week) intensive “intervention” is useful, but insufficient for longer term impact; a longer-term program is needed

• Most research funding agencies do not include a knowledge translation component in their RFP’s, and report requirements

• It is important to locate the Institute in settings where knowledge translation is actually demonstrated in ‘real life’.

Some Future Challenges• Designing, and obtaining support for, a longer-

term program; including an on-going system of support (mentoring, resources, etc.)

• Assisting SI “alumni” to apply their new skills and knowledge (and motivation) in their own institutional and national settings

• Working with training institutions and funding agencies so that knowledge translation (“research to action”) competencies and practices are integral to their programs --- that is, it becomes ‘main line’

Thank you!

www.ccghr.ca