Let's Talk About It: A Narrative Review of Digital Approaches for Disseminating and Communicating Health Research and Innovation.

Best health practice and policy are derived from research, yet the adoption of research findings into health practice and policy continues to lag. Efforts to close this knowledge-to-action gap can be addressed through knowledge translation, which is composed of knowledge synthesis, dissemination, exchange, and application. Although all components warrant investigation, improvements in knowledge dissemination are particularly needed. Specifically, as society continues to evolve and technology becomes increasingly present in everyday life, knowing how to share research findings (with the appropriate audience, using tailored messaging, and through the right digital medium) is an important component towards improved health knowledge translation. As such, this article presents a review of digital presentation formats and communication channels that can be leveraged by health researchers, as well as practitioners and policy makers, for knowledge dissemination of health research. In addition, this article highlights a series of additional factors worth consideration, as well as areas for future direction.

Scoping review of complexity theory in health services research.

BACKGROUND: There are calls for better application of theory in health services research. Research exploring knowledge translation and interprofessional collaboration are two examples, and in both areas, complexity theory has been identified as potentially useful. However, how best to conceptualize and operationalize complexity theory in health services research is uncertain. The purpose of this scoping review was to explore how complexity theory has been incorporated in health services research focused on allied health, medicine, and nursing in order to offer guidance for future application. Given the extensiveness of how complexity theory could be conceptualized and ultimately operationalized within health services research, a scoping review of complexity theory in health services research is warranted. METHODS: A scoping review of published research in English was conducted using CINAHL, EMBASE, Medline, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases. We searched terms synonymous with complexity theory. RESULTS: We included 44 studies in this review: 27 were qualitative, 14 were quantitative, and 3 were mixed methods. Case study was the most common method. Long-term care was the most studied setting. The majority of research was exploratory and focused on relationships between health care workers. Authors most commonly used complexity theory as a conceptual framework for their study. Authors described complexity theory in their research in a variety of ways. The most common attributes of complexity theory used in health services research included relationships, self-organization, and diversity. A common theme across descriptions of complexity theory is that authors incorporate aspects of the theory related to how diverse relationships and communication between individuals in a system can influence change. CONCLUSION: Complexity theory is incorporated in many ways across a variety of research designs to explore a multitude of phenomena.. Although complexity theory shows promise in health services research, particularly related to relationships and interactions, conceptual confusion and inconsistent application hinders the operationalization of this potentially important perspective. Generalizability from studies that incorporate complexity theory is, therefore, difficult. Heterogeneous conceptualization and operationalization of complexity theory in health services research suggests there is no universally agreed upon approach of how to use this theory in health services research. Future research should include clear definitions and descriptions of complexity and how it was used in studies. Clear reporting will aid in determining how best to use complexity theory in health services research.