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’
Top Related