Making research relevant: if it is an evidence-based practice, where's the practice-based evidence?

Area of Science:

• Health Services Research
• Knowledge Translation
• Evidence-Based Practice

Background:

• The research-practice gap is often addressed by improving guideline dissemination.
• Current approaches focus on communicating research findings to practitioners.
• This overlooks issues in research production and vetting that limit relevance.

Purpose of the Study:

• To examine upstream factors contributing to the research-practice gap.
• To identify conceptual fallacies in current knowledge translation models.
• To propose remedies for enhancing the relevance of research for practice.

Main Methods:

• Critical analysis of the "pipeline" model of research translation.
• Examination of assumptions about practitioners as passive recipients of guidelines.
• Review of processes for vetting research for systematic reviews and guidelines.

Main Results:

• Identified a "fallacy of the pipeline" where research becomes irrelevant during vetting.
• Identified a "fallacy of the empty vessel" assuming practitioners passively receive guidelines.
• Current methods often render research less applicable to real-world practice.

Conclusions:

• Rethinking the research-practice gap requires addressing research production, not just dissemination.
• Participatory research approaches can enhance relevance.
• Emphasizing external validity in peer review, funding, and publication is crucial.