Summary
Identifying Priorities for Research in KT: Forming an International Collaboration
An international research team meeting was held June 12 and 13, 2008 in Sidney, BC, Canada. The meeting was funded by a SSHRC International Opportunities Developmental Grant. Our goal was to identify a future research priority related to a user-driven theme of knowledge translation. Team members represented a broad range of perspectives and included Elizabeth Banister (PI), co-investigators Helen Moewakabarnes (Massey University, NZ), Mary Ann McCabe (US), Rejean Landry (Universite Laval), Anne Marshall (U Victoria), and Deborah Begoray (U Victoria); collaborator Peter Levesque (Knowledge Mobilization Works); and U Victoria doctoral students Melissa Edwards and Maureen Ryan. Regrets were sent by David Gough (UK), Kate McKegg (NZ), Bonnie Leadbeater (U Victoria), & Rod McCormick (UBC). .
To identify a specific research priority we first brainstormed ideas related to the broad area of knowledge translation and youth health transitions. We agreed that more information was needed about youth-directed, health-based initiatives. Little is known about the processes of how knowledge is taken up and used by individuals and communities and/or how knowledge users’ involvement improves the way that a research agenda is developed and implemented. We live in an age where numbers of health-related studies are greater than before, yet this information is not making a difference in youth health at national and global levels.
Through our discussions we decided to focus our proposal on using a scoping study. Our proposed scoping study will focus on evaluating available literature and identifying gaps in knowledge pertaining to youth-driven, health-focused initiatives. A scoping study aims to map key concepts of a research problem and explore a variety of evidence and information regarding those concepts. This methodological approach will be beneficial to this early phase of the team’s research agenda because it will provide a preliminary overview of existing literature for identifying areas where more research may be conducted in the future.
During the meeting, we drafted the proposal by accessing a shared Google document we each could access through our own computers. Our process of writing the proposal alternated between working as a whole and working in dyads with members focusing on specific sections according to their areas of expertise. The application Google Documents, which stores documents online and allows each team member to have access to and edit the document, was highly effective as a tool of collaboration.
Following a full day of discussion and writing we engaged in various informal social activities such as walking along the waterfront and perusing local book stores. As the meeting neared its end on the second day, we discussed the possibility of future face-to-face meetings. We also considered virtual software applications, which enable team meetings via the Internet for future research planning and collaboration. The team’s hard work culminated with a complete first draft of the proposal. Group members, including those who were not able to attend the meeting are encouraged to continue adding to the Google document over the next several months until the proposal is completed. We look forward to continuing our collaboration in this important area of research.
