Background
Methods
Data sources and search strategy for identification of studies
Study selection
Type of participants
Type of intervention
Type of outcomes
Type of studies
Screening, quality assessment and data extraction
Screening
Quality assessment
Data extraction
Results
Participants and settings
Knowledge translation strategies
Effect of the intervention
Change in knowledge
Randomized controlled trials (3) | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Study | Measurement period | Study population | groups | Baseline | Follow up | Overall effect | Measurement |
Barwick 2009 | Baseline | 34 Child & youth mental health practitioners | Mean Score: | Mean Score: | F= 2.37 | CAFAS knowledge questionnaire (content knowledge): 20 true/false questions reduced to a total score. Total scores ranged from 0 to 20. | |
End of intervention (11 months) | I: Communities of Practice n=17 | 12.1 | 14.1 | p=0.14 | |||
C: Usual Practice n=17 | 10.4 | 10.8 | |||||
Di Noia 2003 | Baseline | 188 school personnel, community providers, and policy makers | Mean Scores: | Mean Scores: | F =25.67 | Individual-item measures with Likert-scaled response options to determine if respondents knew where to locate drug abuse prevention findings and materials. | |
Follow up (6 months) | I: Pamphlet n=55 | 0.94 | 1.04 | p<0.05 | |||
I: CD-ROM n=64 | 0.96 | 0.75 | Lower scores are indicative of more favourable ratings. | ||||
I: Internet n=69 | 0.73 | 0.63 | |||||
Forsetlund 2003 | Baseline | 148 public health physicians | I: Workshop, information service, discussion list, free access to databases n=73 | Mean Scores | Mean Difference | Baseline scores included in analysis. Scores were summed and means for individual overall scores computed. | |
End of intervention (1.5 years) | |||||||
SK: 0.4 | |||||||
t=4.3 | |||||||
95% CI (0.2-0.6) | Respondents graded self-perceived knowledge (SK) and knowledge about terms of importance to critical appraisal (CK) on scales ranging from 0 to 2 for CK and from 0 to 3 for SK. An additional question was added to concept knowledge, scored as either 0 or 1. Higher scores indicative of more favourable ratings. | ||||||
SK:1.1 | p=0.00 | ||||||
CK:1.3 | CK: 0.2 | ||||||
t=2.6 | |||||||
95% CI (0.0-0.3) | |||||||
p=0.01 | |||||||
C: Access to free library services for one year n=75 | SK:0.7 | ||||||
CK:1.1 |
Change in practice
Randomized controlled trials (4) | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Study | Measurement period | Study population | Groups | Baseline | Follow up | Overall effect | Comments |
Barwick 2009 | Baseline | 34 Child & youth mental health practitioners | I: Communities of Practice n=17 | Mean Scores | Mean Scores | ||
End of intervention (12 months) | Use: | Use: | Use: |
Use- 20-item questionnaire of self reported use of CAFAS implementation supports reduced to a total score. Responses were 'yes', 'no', or 'don't know/does not apply'. | |||
4.88 | 6.55 | F=0.02 | |||||
p=0.87 | |||||||
Change: | Change: | Change: |
Change-10-question Likert scale of self- reported change reduced to a total practice change score. Items were rated as 'very much', 'somewhat', 'very little', or 'not at all'. | ||||
3.00 | 8.81 | F=0.20 | |||||
p=0.65 | |||||||
Rating: | Rating: | Rating: |
Rating: Total number of times clinicians rated the CAFAS in practice. | ||||
NR | 152 | NR | |||||
C: Usual Practice n=17 | Use: | Use: | |||||
4.88 | 4.22 | ||||||
Change: | Change: | ||||||
1.33 | 1.80 | ||||||
Rating: | Rating: | ||||||
NR | 65 | ||||||
Dobbins 2009 | Baseline (2004) | 108 public health departments in Canada | I: Tailored and targeted messaging | Mean Scores | Mean Scores | ||
GIDM 5.61 | GIDM 5.75 | GIDM p < 0.45 |
GIDM-Global Evidence-Informed Decision Making- Mean self report score on the extent to which research evidence was considered in a recent program planning decision in the previous 12 months. | ||||
End of Intervention (2006) | n=36 | HPP 5.49 | HPP 7.89 | HPP < 0.01 | |||
I: Services of a knowledge broker | GIDM 5.45 | GIDM 6.08 | Responses ranged from: 1= not at all to 7= completely/ | ||||
n=36 | HPP 6.53 | HPP 6.03 | |||||
C:Access to health evidence.ca registry | GIDM 5.43 | GIDM 6.17 |
HPP-Public Health Policies and Programs Respondents asked whether the public health policies and programs were being implemented by their health department (yes/no). A ‘yes’ was coded as 01 and a ‘no’ was coded as a ‘02’. Total number was summed and compared across groups from baseline to post intervention. | ||||
HPP 6.50 | HPP 6.22 | ||||||
n=36 | |||||||
Di Noia | Baseline | 188 school personnel, community providers, and policy makers | Mean Score | Mean Score | NS | Frequency of searching for information | |
2003 | Follow up (6 months) | I: Pamphlet n=55 | 1.56 | 1.60 | Statistical test not reported. Lower scores are indicative of more favourable ratings | ||
I: CD-ROM n=64 | 1.53 | 1.48 | |||||
I: Internet n=69 | 1.62 | 1.51 | Internet was most effective intervention. | ||||
Forsetlund 2003 | Baseline | 148 public health physicians | I: Workshop, information service, discussion list, free access to databases n=73 | Use of Research Percentage | Use of Research Percentage | NR | Statistical test not reported. |
End of intervention (1.5 years) | 0% | 0% | Analysis of the contents of local health service reports for use of research. Respondents sent in relevant documents analyzed by researchers. Scores for reports were recoded and reported as 'used' or 'not used' research. | ||||
C: Free access to library services n=75 | 0% | 1.3% |
Study | Measurement period | Study population | Groups | Time (month/ year) | Intervention | Control | Overall effect | Measurement |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Hanbury | Baseline | 93 community mental health professionals | I: Educational session (didactic presentation, peer discussion, group work on real life vignettes) | 05/03 | 10 | 58 | Intervention: | Monthly percentage adherence |
2009 | (2004) | 06/03 | 23 | 75 | NR | |||
07/03 | 13 | 65 | National | National event was modeled for the control and intervention site | ||||
08/03 | 27 | 78 | Event: | |||||
n = 49 | 09/03 | 42 | 72 | (t = 3.28, | ||||
C: Usual Practice | 10/03 | 35 | 62 | P = 0.0001) | ||||
11/03 | 15 | 65 | ||||||
n = unstated | 12/03 | 13 | 37 | |||||
01/04 | 24 | 51 | ||||||
02/04 | 17 | 60 | ||||||
03/04 | 37 | 74 | ||||||
04/04
| 55 | 72 | ||||||
05/04 | 46 | 86 | ||||||
06/04 | 17 | 70 | ||||||
07/04 | 57 | 81 | ||||||
08/04 | 62 | 85 | ||||||
09/04 | 63 | 76 | ||||||
10/04 | 65 | 82 | ||||||
11/04
| 83 | 77 | ||||||
12/04
| 63 | 71 | ||||||
01/05
| 85 | 67 | ||||||
02/05
| 91 | 83 | ||||||
03/05 | 62 | 74 | ||||||
04/05 | 72 | 69 | ||||||
05/05 | 72 | 69 |