Academic Health Science Centres as Vehicles for Knowledge Mobilisation in Australia? A Qualitative Study

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 College of Public Health, Medical and Veterinary Sciences, James Cook University, Townsville, QLD, Australia

2 Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia

3 Centre for Sustainable Human Resource Management and Wellbeing, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

4 Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, UK

5 The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK

6 Caring Futures Institute, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia

7 Monash Business School, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

8 Monash Centre for Health Research and Implementation, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

9 Warwick Business School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK

10 Adelaide Nursing School, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia

11 Australian Centre for Health Services Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

Abstract

Background
Despite increasing investments in academic health science centres (AHSCs) in Australia and an expectation that they will serve as vehicles for knowledge translation and exchange, there is limited empirical evidence on whether and how they deliver impact. The aim of this study was to examine and compare the early development of four Australian AHSCs to explore how they are enacting their impact-focused role.
 
Methods
A descriptive qualitative methodology was employed across four AHSCs located in diverse health system settings in urban and regional locations across Australia. Data were collected via semi-structured interviews with 15 academic, industry and executive board members of participating AHSCs. The analysis combined inductive and deductive elements, with inductive categories mapped to deductive themes corresponding to the study aims.
 
Results
AHSCs in Australia are in an emergent state of development and are following different pathways. Whilst varied approaches to support research translation are apparent, there is a dominant focus on structure and governance, as opposed to action-oriented roles and processes to deliver strategic goals. Balancing collaboration and competition between partners presents a challenge, as does identifying appropriate ways to evaluate impact.
 
Conclusion
The early stage of development of AHSCs in Australia presents an important opportunity for formative learning and evaluation to optimise their enactment of knowledge mobilisation processes for impact.

Highlights

 

Commentaries Published on this Paper    

  • When Health Systems Consider Research to Be Beyond the Scope of Healthcare Delivery, Research Translation Is Crippled; Comment on “Academic Health Science Centres as Vehicles for Knowledge Mobilisation in Australia? A Qualitative Study”

         Abstract | PDF

 

  • Knowledge Mobilization and Academic Health Science Centres in Australia; Comment on “Academic Health Science Centres as Vehicles for Knowledge Mobilisation in Australia? A Qualitative Study”

        Abstract | PDF

 

  •  AHSCs as Health Policy Transfer: Some Emergent Evidence From Australia; Comment on “Academic Health Science Centres as Vehicles for Knowledge Mobilisation in Australia? A Qualitative Study”

         Abstract | PDF

       

Authors' Response to the Commentaries

  •  Mobilising Knowledge in (and About) Academic Health Science Centres: Boundary Spanning, Inter-organisational Governance and Systems Thinking

        Abstract | PDF

 

Keywords

References

  1. Theile DE, Scott IA, Martin JH, Gavrilidis A. Enabling the success of academic health science centres in Australia: where is the leadership? Med J Aust. 2014;201(11):636-638. doi:10.5694/mja14.00992
  2. Fisk NM, Wesselingh SL, Beilby JJ, et al. Academic health science centres in Australia: let's get competitive. Med J Aust. 2011;194(2):59-60.
  3. Dickinson H, Ledger J. Accelerating research translation in healthcare: the Australian approach. In: McDermott AM, Kitchener M, Exworthy M, eds. Managing Improvement in Healthcare: Attaining, Sustaining and Spreading Quality. London: Palgrave MacMillan; 2018:201-216. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-62235-4_12
  4. Kislov R, Wilson PM, Knowles S, Boaden R. Learning from the emergence of NIHR Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRCs): a systematic review of evaluations. Implement Sci. 2018;13(1):111. doi:10.1186/s13012-018-0805-y
  5. French CE, Ferlie E, Fulop NJ. The international spread of Academic Health Science Centres: a scoping review and the case of policy transfer to England. Health Policy. 2014;117(3):382-391. doi:10.1016/j.healthpol.2014.07.005
  6. Edelman A, Taylor J, Ovseiko PV, Topp SM. The role of academic health centres in improving health equity: a systematic review. J Health Organ Manag. 2018;32(2):279-297. doi:10.1108/jhom-09-2017-0255
  7. Ferlie E, Nicolini D, Ledger J, D’Andreta D, Kravcenko D, de Pury J. NHS top managers, knowledge exchange and leadership: the early development of Academic Health Science Networks–a mixed-methods study. Health Serv Deliv Res. 2017;5(17):1-204. doi:10.3310/hsdr05170
  8. Rycroft-Malone J, Burton CR, Wilkinson J, et al. Collective action for implementation: a realist evaluation of organisational collaboration in healthcare. Implement Sci. 2016;11:17. doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0380-z
  9. Fitzgerald L, Harvey G. Translational networks in healthcare? evidence on the design and initiation of organizational networks for knowledge mobilization. Soc Sci Med. 2015;138:192-200. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.06.015
  10. Bradshaw C, Atkinson S, Doody O. Employing a qualitative description approach in health care research. Glob Qual Nurs Res. 2017;4:2333393617742282. doi:10.1177/2333393617742282
  11. Bornbaum CC, Kornas K, Peirson L, Rosella LC. Exploring the function and effectiveness of knowledge brokers as facilitators of knowledge translation in health-related settings: a systematic review and thematic analysis. Implement Sci. 2015;10:162. doi:10.1186/s13012-015-0351-9
  12. Oborn E, Barrett M, Prince K, Racko G. Balancing exploration and exploitation in transferring research into practice: a comparison of five knowledge translation entity archetypes. Implement Sci. 2013;8:104. doi:10.1186/1748-5908-8-104
  13. Gulati R, Wohlgezogen F, Zhelyazkov P. The two facets of collaboration: cooperation and coordination in strategic alliances. Acad Manag Ann. 2012;6(1):531-583. doi:10.1080/19416520.2012.691646
  14. Lockett A, El Enany N, Currie G, et al. A formative evaluation of Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC): institutional entrepreneurship for service innovation. Health Serv Deliv Res. 2014;2(31):1-124. doi:10.3310/hsdr02310
International Journal of Health Policy and Management
Volume 11, Issue 6
June 2022
Pages 840-846

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 11 May 2020
  • Revise Date: 14 August 2020
  • Accept Date: 28 November 2020
  • First Publish Date: 14 December 2020

Share

How to cite

Statistics