Bridging the gap: Identifying diverse stakeholder needs and barriers to accessing evidence and resources for children’s pain

IF 2 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Nicole E. MacKenzie, C. Chambers, Jennifer A. Parker, Erin Aubrey, I. Jordan, D. Richards, Justina Marianayagam, Samina Ali, F. Campbell, G. Finley, Emily Gruenwoldt, B. Stevens, J. Stinson, K. Birnie
{"title":"Bridging the gap: Identifying diverse stakeholder needs and barriers to accessing evidence and resources for children’s pain","authors":"Nicole E. MacKenzie, C. Chambers, Jennifer A. Parker, Erin Aubrey, I. Jordan, D. Richards, Justina Marianayagam, Samina Ali, F. Campbell, G. Finley, Emily Gruenwoldt, B. Stevens, J. Stinson, K. Birnie","doi":"10.1080/24740527.2022.2045192","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Stakeholder engagement in knowledge mobilization (KMb) activities can bridge the knowledge to action gap within children’s pain but may be influenced by how well stakeholder needs and barriers to evidence-based resources are addressed. The needs of different Canadian stakeholder groups related to children’s pain have not been examined, limiting the degree to which KMb efforts can be tailored to each group.\n The study aim was to identify shared and unique needs, barriers, and accessibility of evidence for children’s pain across three stakeholder groups: knowledge users (i.e., health professionals, administrators, policymakers, educators), researchers (including trainees), and patients, caregivers, and family members.\n This study comprised an online needs assessment survey. Analyses included descriptive statistics, one-way analyses of variances, and chi-square tests to examine differences between stakeholder groups. Open-ended responses were analyzed using conventional content analysis.\n A total of 711 stakeholders completed the survey. Educational materials were the most utilized evidence-based resources among all stakeholders. Researchers and patients/caregivers/family members found resources significantly less accessible than knowledge users (P = 0.008). Knowledge of evidence was the primary barrier across all stakeholder groups (69.2%, n = 492); however, each group reported a need for stakeholder-specific resources. Finally, stakeholders desired opportunities to engage in the KMb process through partnerships and an increased awareness of children’s pain.\n Though stakeholders experience common barriers to evidence-based resources for children’s pain, their needs to address these barriers are diverse. Evidence-based resources should be tailored for stakeholders’ contexts, with diverse audiences in mind.\n","PeriodicalId":53214,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Pain-Revue Canadienne de la Douleur","volume":"6 1","pages":"48 - 64"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Pain-Revue Canadienne de la Douleur","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24740527.2022.2045192","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Stakeholder engagement in knowledge mobilization (KMb) activities can bridge the knowledge to action gap within children’s pain but may be influenced by how well stakeholder needs and barriers to evidence-based resources are addressed. The needs of different Canadian stakeholder groups related to children’s pain have not been examined, limiting the degree to which KMb efforts can be tailored to each group. The study aim was to identify shared and unique needs, barriers, and accessibility of evidence for children’s pain across three stakeholder groups: knowledge users (i.e., health professionals, administrators, policymakers, educators), researchers (including trainees), and patients, caregivers, and family members. This study comprised an online needs assessment survey. Analyses included descriptive statistics, one-way analyses of variances, and chi-square tests to examine differences between stakeholder groups. Open-ended responses were analyzed using conventional content analysis. A total of 711 stakeholders completed the survey. Educational materials were the most utilized evidence-based resources among all stakeholders. Researchers and patients/caregivers/family members found resources significantly less accessible than knowledge users (P = 0.008). Knowledge of evidence was the primary barrier across all stakeholder groups (69.2%, n = 492); however, each group reported a need for stakeholder-specific resources. Finally, stakeholders desired opportunities to engage in the KMb process through partnerships and an increased awareness of children’s pain. Though stakeholders experience common barriers to evidence-based resources for children’s pain, their needs to address these barriers are diverse. Evidence-based resources should be tailored for stakeholders’ contexts, with diverse audiences in mind.
弥合差距:确定不同利益攸关方的需求和获取儿童痛苦证据和资源的障碍
利益攸关方参与知识动员(KMb)活动可以弥合儿童疼痛方面从知识到行动的差距,但可能受到利益攸关方需求和基于证据的资源障碍得到解决的程度的影响。与儿童疼痛相关的不同加拿大利益相关者群体的需求尚未得到审查,限制了九巴为每个群体量身定制的程度。研究的目的是确定三个利益相关者群体对儿童疼痛的共同和独特的需求、障碍和证据的可及性:知识使用者(即卫生专业人员、管理人员、政策制定者、教育工作者)、研究人员(包括受训人员)、患者、护理人员和家庭成员。这项研究包括一项在线需求评估调查。分析包括描述性统计、单向方差分析和卡方检验,以检验利益相关者群体之间的差异。开放式回答采用传统的内容分析进行分析。共有711名持份者完成调查。教材是所有利益相关者中使用最多的循证资源。研究人员和患者/护理人员/家属发现资源的可及性明显低于知识使用者(P = 0.008)。对证据的了解是所有利益相关者群体的主要障碍(69.2%,n = 492);然而,每个小组都报告了对特定涉众资源的需求。最后,持份者希望有机会通过伙伴关系和提高对儿童痛苦的认识,参与九巴进程。尽管利益攸关方在获得儿童疼痛的循证资源方面遇到了共同的障碍,但他们解决这些障碍的需求是多种多样的。基于证据的资源应根据利益攸关方的情况量身定制,并考虑到不同的受众。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
12.50%
发文量
36
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信