ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Knowledge translation (KT) models that represent an individual's perspective are a sign of effective KT. Some common challenges in KT include participant engagement, organization of the team, and time demands of the participants. We implemented a unique tripartite KT program to (1) share current research, (2) inform persons living with multiple sclerosis (pwMS) about the clinical research process, and (3) invite pwMS to immediately participate in clinical research. The primary aim was to determine participants' perspectives on the value and acceptability of an experiential research program offered at a patient and family educational conference. METHODS: A team of researchers identified factors that would impact the logistics of hosting an experiential research program at a conference and designed a unique tripartite KT program. The local multiple sclerosis (MS) society was engaged to select an appropriate location and invite stakeholders to the conference. A survey to determine participants' perspectives on the value and acceptability of the experiential research program was developed and analyzed. RESULTS: 65 pwMS attended the conference, and 44 (67.7%) participated in the on-site experiential research program. 72.7% of the participants completed the survey, of which 93.8% stated that they strongly agree or agree with the following statements: "Did you feel like participating in research today was a valuable experience to you?" and "Did you feel like you were contributing to MS research?" 100% of the participants agreed or strongly agreed when asked "would you like to see more research activities taking place at these kinds of events?" CONCLUSIONS: This paper describes the logistics and challenges of conducting an experiential KT program, which proved to be rewarding for pwMS. The majority of pwMS attending the conference agreed to participate in the on-site experiential research program and an overwhelming majority of participants felt the experience was valuable.
ABSTRACT
Management of coastal areas is necessary to maintain and protect existing permanent structures. Coastal erosion management falls into soft and hard shoreline stabilization options with the United States tending to favor hard. However, post-Hurricane Sandy 2012, soft dune and beach replenishment have become more favorable in the U.S. with support being necessarily contingent upon an understanding of the pros, cons, and concepts surrounding each management strategy. Misconceptions could thus lead to a halt in progress and poor decisions with implications for community safety. We sought to gain a better understanding of current knowledge surrounding best practices in coastal management communities. Our assumption was that misconceptions in one coastal area, New Jersey, are likely echoed in other coastal areas in the U.S. and internationally. We employed a two-phase research design with an exploratory phase using semi-structured interview guidelines to collect data from a quota sample of 53 local residents and then tested the distribution of knowledge about coastal management facts by asking a convenience sample of 300 residents a structured set of 15 questions. Study participants identify differences in how beaches are managed and how protected they conversely consider an area to be. Dunes are generally preferred over hard engineering and replenishment. However, many key concepts regarding how dunes function naturally, with regards to the role of vegetation and fencing, are poorly understood suggesting a need for greater education surrounding these topics. Participants support continued tax investment in coastal areas to avoid retreat but recognize a tragedy of the commons in such actions for future generations. Learning who knows what, may contribute to more fruitful dialogues among stakeholders to pave the way for the adoption of suitable and sustainable management practices for better protected shorelines.
