How does integrated knowledge translation (IKT) compare to other collaborative research approaches to generating and translating knowledge learning from experts in the field?
posted on 2020-04-03, 08:20authored byTram Nguyen, Ian D. Graham, Kelly J. Mrklas, Sarah Bowen, Margaret Cargo, Carole A. Estabrooks, Anita Kothari, John Lavis, Ann C. Macaulay, Martha MacLeod, David Phipps, Vivian R. Ramsden, Mary J. Renfrew, Jon Salsberg, Nina Wallerstein
Research funders in Canada and abroad have made substantial investments in supporting
collaborative research approaches to generating and translating knowledge as it is believed to increase knowledge use. Canadian health research funders have advocated for the use of integrated knowledge translation (IKT) in health research, however, there is limited research around how IKT compares to other collaborative research approaches. Our objective was to better understand how IKT compares with engaged scholarship, Mode 2 research, co-production and participatory research by identifying the differences and similarities among them in order to provide conceptual clarity and reduce researcher and knowledge user confusion about these common approaches. Methods: We employed a qualitative descriptive method using interview data to better understand experts’
perspectives and experiences on collaborative research approaches. Participants’ responses were analysed through thematic analysis to elicit core themes. The analysis was centred around the concept of IKT, as it is the most recent approach; IKT was then compared and contrasted with engaged scholarship, Mode 2 research, co-production and
participatory research. As this was an iterative process, data triangulation and member-checking were conducted with participants to ensure accuracy of the emergent themes and analysis process