Knowledge-to-Care: Is there a best way of support practitioners to getting evidence into practice? An ongoing debate

Dyson, Judith (2025) Knowledge-to-Care: Is there a best way of support practitioners to getting evidence into practice? An ongoing debate. Evidence and Policy. ISSN 1744-2648 (In Press)

Text Knowledge-to-Care_main_manuscript_clean_copy_not_anonymised.pdf - Accepted Version Restricted to Repository staff only Download (338kB) | Request a copy

Abstract

Getting evidence into practice remains a stubborn problem. To get Knowledge-to-Care (K2C) we identify five “impact components”: improvement science, implementation science, knowledge mobilisation, patient public involvement and engagement and co-working. In this paper we have i) provided a simple definition for each component, ii) established an overview of whom, what, when, where, why and how components have been reported and/or combined in published literature and iii) enhanced understanding of how components are selected and combined. We i) identified seminal papers to capture common definitions of components of impact, their synonyms and evolution, ii) sampled the most relevant papers (searching CINAHL and Medline, from 2018-2021) to map the landscape where one or more impact component had been applied in empirical research, iii) conducted focus groups and iv) a survey to deepen our understanding of these issues from practitioner and researcher perspectives. We found differentiation between components difficult due to multiple definitions and overlapping features. Workshops and survey demonstrate blurred application of components with participants drawing on a common pool of strategies to influence practice. Our future intention is to develop strategies to support practitioners to advance uptake of evidence-based care by demystifying the “science” of components and how they may be applied in practice. To this end, we invite debate regarding the questions: How do we “science up” without hindering application of ImpS, ImpR and KMb in practice? Are the differences between impS, impR and KMb real, or simply in the eye of the beholder? Is there a need to go beyond the potentially “tribal” labels of impR, impS and KMb and consider more deeply specific ways of working?

Item Type:	Article
Dates:	Date Event 19 November 2025 Accepted
Subjects:	CAH02 - subjects allied to medicine > CAH02-04 - nursing and midwifery > CAH02-04-02 - adult nursing
Divisions:	Nursing and Midwifery > Adult Nursing
Depositing User:	Gemma Tonks
Date Deposited:	02 Dec 2025 13:59
Last Modified:	02 Dec 2025 13:59
URI:	https://www.open-access.bcu.ac.uk/id/eprint/16760

Actions (login required)

View Item