Comparing three knowledge communication strategies - Diffusion, Dissemination and Translation - through randomized controlled studies.

This paper describes a series of three randomized controlled case studies comparing the effectiveness of three strategies for communicating new research-based knowledge (Diffusion, Dissemination, Translation), to different Assistive Technology (AT) stakeholder groups. Pre and post intervention measures for level of knowledge use (unaware, aware, interested, using) via the LOKUS instrument, assessed the relative effectiveness of the three strategies. The latter two approaches were both more effective than diffusion but also equally effective. The results question the value added by tailoring research findings to specific audiences, and instead supports the critical yet neglected role for relevance in determining knowledge use by stakeholders.

Level Of Knowledge Use Survey (LOKUS): A validated instrument for tracking knowledge uptake and use.

Researchers working in fields intending to generate beneficial socio-economic impacts are increasingly challenged to demonstrate evidence that the findings from their studies have value to audiences beyond the peer academic community. These diverse and diffuse target audiences may include clinicians, consumers, manufacturers and information brokers. This paper summarizes a project that designed, constructed and validated a web-based instrument for collecting and analyzing self-reported data on knowledge use. The Level Of Knowledge Use Survey instrument is valid and reliable for measuring uptake of new knowledge and for tracking changes in level of knowledge use over time.

Development of a measure of knowledge use by stakeholders in rehabilitation technology.

OBJECTIVES: Uptake of new knowledge by diverse and diffuse stakeholders of health-care technology innovations has been a persistent challenge, as has been measurement of this uptake. This article describes the development of the Level of Knowledge Use Survey instrument, a web-based measure of self-reported knowledge use. METHODS: The Level of Knowledge Use Survey instrument was developed in the context of assessing effectiveness of knowledge communication strategies in rehabilitation technology. It was validated on samples representing five stakeholder types: researchers, manufacturers, clinician-practitioners, knowledge brokers, and consumers. Its structure is broadly based on Rogers' stages of innovation adoption. Its item generation was initially guided by Hall et al's Levels of Use framework. Item selection was based on content validity indices computed from expert ratings (n 1 = 4; n 2 = 3). Five representative stakeholders established usability of the web version. The version included 47 items (content validity index for individual items >0.78; content validity index for a scale or set of items >0.90) in self-reporting format. Psychometrics were then established for the version. RESULTS: Analyses of data from small (n = 69) and large (n = 215) samples using the Level of Knowledge Use Survey instrument suggested a conceptual model of four levels of knowledge use-Non-awareness, Awareness, Interest, and Use. The levels covered eight dimensions and six user action categories. The sequential nature of levels was inconclusive due to low cell frequencies. The Level of Knowledge Use Survey instrument showed adequate content validity (≈ 0.88; n = 3) and excellent test-retest reliability (1.0; n = 69). It also demonstrated good construct validity (n = 215) for differentiating among new knowledge outputs (p < 0.001) and among stakeholder types (0.001 < p ≤ 0.013). It showed strong responsiveness to change between baseline and follow-up testing (0.001 < p ≤ 0.002; n = 215). CONCLUSION: The Level of Knowledge Use Survey instrument is valid and reliable for measuring uptake of innovations across diffuse stakeholders of rehabilitation technologies and therefore also for tracking changes in knowledge use.

Modeling technology innovation: how science, engineering, and industry methods can combine to generate beneficial socioeconomic impacts.

BACKGROUND: Government-sponsored science, technology, and innovation (STI) programs support the socioeconomic aspects of public policies, in addition to expanding the knowledge base. For example, beneficial healthcare services and devices are expected to result from investments in research and development (R&D) programs, which assume a causal link to commercial innovation. Such programs are increasingly held accountable for evidence of impact-that is, innovative goods and services resulting from R&D activity. However, the absence of comprehensive models and metrics skews evidence gathering toward bibliometrics about research outputs (published discoveries), with less focus on transfer metrics about development outputs (patented prototypes) and almost none on econometrics related to production outputs (commercial innovations). This disparity is particularly problematic for the expressed intent of such programs, as most measurable socioeconomic benefits result from the last category of outputs. METHODS: This paper proposes a conceptual framework integrating all three knowledge-generating methods into a logic model, useful for planning, obtaining, and measuring the intended beneficial impacts through the implementation of knowledge in practice. Additionally, the integration of the Context-Input-Process-Product (CIPP) model of evaluation proactively builds relevance into STI policies and programs while sustaining rigor. RESULTS: The resulting logic model framework explicitly traces the progress of knowledge from inputs, following it through the three knowledge-generating processes and their respective knowledge outputs (discovery, invention, innovation), as it generates the intended socio-beneficial impacts. It is a hybrid model for generating technology-based innovations, where best practices in new product development merge with a widely accepted knowledge-translation approach. Given the emphasis on evidence-based practice in the medical and health fields and "bench to bedside" expectations for knowledge transfer, sponsors and grantees alike should find the model useful for planning, implementing, and evaluating innovation processes. CONCLUSIONS: High-cost/high-risk industries like healthcare require the market deployment of technology-based innovations to improve domestic society in a global economy. An appropriate balance of relevance and rigor in research, development, and production is crucial to optimize the return on public investment in such programs. The technology-innovation process needs a comprehensive operational model to effectively allocate public funds and thereby deliberately and systematically accomplish socioeconomic benefits.

The meaning of communication: experiences with augmentative communication devices.

This study is a secondary analysis of data collected from end-users of Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) devices as part of a project of the Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center on Technology Transfer (T2RERC). The original data, obtained from a Web-based focus group, were used to identify unmet consumer needs in existing AAC devices. The purpose of the secondary analysis was to give context to the original study through phenomenological interpretation of the narratives, thereby gaining an understanding of the common meanings and shared experiences and practices of people who use AAC technology. Underlying this study is the interpretive approach of Heideggerian hermeneutics; through reflective thinking, understanding of the human situation of AAC users in everyday life is uncovered or extended. Six themes and one constitutive pattern emerged to explain the participants' experiences with AAC devices: (a) maintaining effective communication, (b) interacting in various situations, (c) AAC device-imposing limitations, (d) wading through prepackaged technology, (e) AAC device giving more than a voice, (f) accepting the AAC device. The constitutive pattern was communication technology enables humanness. This information will make rehabilitation nurses aware of the value of the AAC device for the users and the limitations that the technology may impose on the users, as well as the need for others to accept the device. Nurses gaining this understanding may facilitate integration of AAC systems and the development of patient/nurse communication partnerships.