Indicators to evaluate organisational knowledge brokers: a scoping review

• Main Authors: Julia Scarlett, Birger C. Forsberg, Olivia Biermann, Tanja Kuchenmüller, Ziad El-Khatib
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: BMC 2020-08-01
• Series: Health Research Policy and Systems
• Subjects: Knowledge translation; Policy-making; Capacity-building; Programme evaluation; Indicators
• Online Access: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12961-020-00607-8

Abstract Background Knowledge translation (KT) is currently endorsed by global health policy actors as a means to improve outcomes by institutionalising evidence-informed policy-making. Organisational knowledge brokers, comprised of researchers, policy-makers and other stakeholders, are increasingly being used to undertake and promote KT at all levels of health policy-making, though few resources exist to guide the evaluation of these efforts. Using a scoping review methodology, we identified, synthesised and assessed indicators that have been used to evaluate KT infrastructure and capacity-building activities in a health policy context in order to inform the evaluation of organisational knowledge brokers. Methods A scoping review methodology was used. This included the search of Medline, Global Health and the WHO Library databases for studies regarding the evaluation of KT infrastructure and capacity-building activities between health research and policy, published in English from 2005 to 2016. Data on study characteristics, outputs and outcomes measured, related indicators, mode of verification, duration and/or frequency of collection, indicator methods, KT model, and targeted capacity level were extracted and charted for analysis. Results A total of 1073 unique articles were obtained and 176 articles were qualified to be screened in full-text; 32 articles were included in the analysis. Of a total 213 indicators extracted, we identified 174 (174/213; 81.7%) indicators to evaluate the KT infrastructure and capacity-building that have been developed using methods beyond expert opinion. Four validated instruments were identified. The 174 indicators are presented in 8 domains based on an adaptation of the domains of the Lavis et al. framework of linking research to action – general climate, production of research, push efforts, pull efforts, exchange efforts, integrated efforts, evaluation and capacity-building. Conclusion This review presents a total of 174 method-based indicators to evaluate KT infrastructure and capacity-building. The presented indicators can be used or adapted globally by organisational knowledge brokers and other stakeholders in their monitoring and evaluation work.