Coming to understand the child has autism: A process illustrating parents' evolving readiness for engaging in care.

LAY ABSTRACT: What is already known about the topic? Parents of children with autism often learn about their child's autism before diagnosis and can spend long periods seeking care (including assessment) before receiving a diagnosis. Meanwhile, parents' readiness to engage in care at this early stage can vary from parent to parent. What this paper adds? This study revealed how parents come to understand their child has autism-on their own terms, rather than from just talking to professionals. It also explained how parents' growing awareness of their child's autism leads them to feel more motivated to engage in care by seeking information and pursuing services. Four "optional steps" described how parents' growing readiness to engage in care at this early stage can vary, depending on their personal process. Implications for practice, research, or policy The results suggest ways that professionals can be more sensitive (a) to parents' varying awareness of autism and (b) to their varying readiness for being involved in early care. They also suggest ways to tailor parent supports to their individual situation and design care that is more family centered. Not all parents want high levels of involvement. Depending on their personal process, some parents may need care and support that is directed at them before feeling ready for professionals to engage them in care directed at the child.

Parent engagement in autism-related care: a qualitative grounded theory study.

Parents of children with autism assume substantial responsibility for navigating intervention to address autism-related concerns, including involvement in therapy. Little is known, from the perspective of these parents, regarding how to best engage and support them in this navigating process as it evolves over the child's development. In this article, we present findings from a large qualitative study that investigated how parents of children with autism navigate intervention, to construct an in-depth theoretical account of how this group comes to be engaged in individual-level care. Using grounded theory methods and a symbolic interactionist framework, we analyzed select documents and 45 intensive interviews conducted with 32 mothers and 9 expert professionals from urban and rural regions of Ontario, Canada. Parent-defined concerns are the central impetus for the core process of navigating intervention, labeled using parents' language making your own way. We describe how this process is analogous to engaging in care. Four meaning-making processes - defining concerns, informing the self, seeing what is involved, and adapting emotionally - all interacting in an ongoing fashion, together account for parents' evolving readiness and motivation for taking action to navigate intervention. We illustrate how parents' readiness and motivation for navigating intervention (and thus for engagement) evolves over a generalized trajectory, according to three highly overlapping processes experienced by most parents: coming to understand their child has autism, going into high gear, and easing off. These findings indicate multiple empirical conditions and factors affecting engagement that service planners and professionals will likely want to consider when seeking parent involvement as a means to improve outcomes in autism. Additionally, theoretical aspects are relevant to the developing understanding of how healthcare consumers in general become engaged in individual care, with implications for patient-centered care.

Reviewing the research methods literature: principles and strategies illustrated by a systematic overview of sampling in qualitative research.

BACKGROUND: Overviews of methods are potentially useful means to increase clarity and enhance collective understanding of specific methods topics that may be characterized by ambiguity, inconsistency, or a lack of comprehensiveness. This type of review represents a distinct literature synthesis method, although to date, its methodology remains relatively undeveloped despite several aspects that demand unique review procedures. The purpose of this paper is to initiate discussion about what a rigorous systematic approach to reviews of methods, referred to here as systematic methods overviews, might look like by providing tentative suggestions for approaching specific challenges likely to be encountered. The guidance offered here was derived from experience conducting a systematic methods overview on the topic of sampling in qualitative research. RESULTS: The guidance is organized into several principles that highlight specific objectives for this type of review given the common challenges that must be overcome to achieve them. Optional strategies for achieving each principle are also proposed, along with discussion of how they were successfully implemented in the overview on sampling. We describe seven paired principles and strategies that address the following aspects: delimiting the initial set of publications to consider, searching beyond standard bibliographic databases, searching without the availability of relevant metadata, selecting publications on purposeful conceptual grounds, defining concepts and other information to abstract iteratively, accounting for inconsistent terminology used to describe specific methods topics, and generating rigorous verifiable analytic interpretations. Since a broad aim in systematic methods overviews is to describe and interpret the relevant literature in qualitative terms, we suggest that iterative decision making at various stages of the review process, and a rigorous qualitative approach to analysis are necessary features of this review type. CONCLUSIONS: We believe that the principles and strategies provided here will be useful to anyone choosing to undertake a systematic methods overview. This paper represents an initial effort to promote high quality critical evaluations of the literature regarding problematic methods topics, which have the potential to promote clearer, shared understandings, and accelerate advances in research methods. Further work is warranted to develop more definitive guidance.

Empirical relationships between numeracy and treatment decision making: A scoping review of the literature.

OBJECTIVES: To determine what is known from the existing literature about empirical relationships between numeracy and the three stages of the treatment decision making process (information exchange, deliberation, and deciding on the treatment to implement). We also examined if, and how, numeracy was mentioned in relation to health literacy. METHODS: A search of four databases returned 2772 records. After de-duplication and three levels of relevance screening, 38 primary studies were included in this review. RESULTS: Relationships between numeracy and the information exchange stage have received greater attention than relationships between numeracy and the deliberation and deciding on the treatment to implement stages. The lack of overlap in the empirical relationships examined in studies, the measure(s) of numeracy used, and the characteristics of study populations, made findings difficult to compare. Multiple knowledge gaps and measurement-related problems were identified. Numeracy and health literacy have largely been treated as separate concepts. CONCLUSION: More research is needed to better understand the importance of numeracy and health literacy to treatment decision making. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Decision aids designed for patients with different levels of health literacy may not meet the needs of patients with different levels of numeracy. The numeracy skills of health professionals require attention.

User-Centered Design and Printed Educational Materials: A Focus Group Study of Primary Care Physician Preferences.

INTRODUCTION: It is challenging for primary care physicians (PCPs) to review and apply the growing amount of clinical evidence available. Printed educational materials (PEMs), which synthesize evidence, are often ineffective at improving knowledge, possibly due to poor design and limited uptake. In this study, we collected PCP preferences for the design and content of physician-oriented PEMs and determined key attributes that may increase their usability and uptake. METHODS: We held 90-minute focus groups with PCPs in Toronto, ON, Canada. Focus groups included discussion about whether and how participants use PEMs, feedback on three examples of PEMs, and a discussion on general format and design preferences in PEMs. We analyzed focus group transcripts using a thematic analysis and summarized results in a list of user preferences. RESULTS: Four focus groups were held with 13 PCPs. We found that participants only read PEMs relevant to their patients and prefer short, concise documents, with links to sources that can provide more detailed information. Simplicity of materials was important, with many participants preferring PEMs without lengthy backgrounds or scientific explanations. Most participants wanted to see key messages highlighted to easily assess the relevance of the materials to their practice. Some participants shared physician-oriented PEMs with patients. DISCUSSION: This study shows that PCPs may prefer shorter, simpler, and more concise documents that have less scientific detail but provide references to further information sources. It is important to understand end user preferences for the design and content of these materials to enhance their uptake.

Redesigning printed educational materials for primary care physicians: design improvements increase usability.

BACKGROUND: Printed educational materials (PEMs) are a frequently used tool to disseminate clinical information and attempt to change behavior within primary care. However, their effect on clinician behavior is limited. In this study, we explored how PEMs can be redesigned to better meet the needs of primary care physicians (PCPs) and whether usability and selection can be increased when design principles and user preferences are used. METHODS: We redesigned a publicly available PEM using physician preferences, design principles, and graphic designer support. We invited PCPs to select their preferred document between the redesigned and original versions in a discrete choice experiment, followed by an assessment of usability with the System Usability Scale and a think aloud process. We conducted this study in both a controlled and opportunistic setting to determine whether usability testing results vary by study location. Think aloud data was thematically analyzed, and results were interpreted using the Technology Acceptance Model. RESULTS: One hundred and eighty four PCPs participated in the discrete choice experiment at the 2014 Family Medicine Forum, a large Canadian conference for family physicians. Of these, 87.7 % preferred the redesigned version. Follow-up interviews were held with a randomly selected group of seven participants. We repeated this in a controlled setting in Toronto, Canada, with a set of 14 participants. Using the System Usability Scale, we found that usability scores were significantly increased with the redesign (p < 0.001). We also found that when PCPs were given the choice between the two versions, they selected the redesigned version as their preferred PEM more often than the original (p < 0.001). Results did not appear to differ between the opportunistic and controlled setting. We used the results of the think aloud process to add to a list of end user preferences developed in a previous study. CONCLUSIONS: We found that redesigning a PEM with user preferences and design principles can improve its usability and result in the PEM being selected more often than the original. We feel this finding supports the involvement of the user, application of design principles, and the assistance of a graphic designer in the development of PEMs.

A scoping review of classification schemes of interventions to promote and integrate evidence into practice in healthcare.

BACKGROUND: Many models and frameworks are currently used to classify or describe knowledge translation interventions to promote and integrate evidence into practice in healthcare. METHODS: We performed a scoping review of intervention classifications in public health, clinical medicine, nursing, policy, behaviour science, improvement science and psychology research published to May 2013 by searching MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and the grey literature. We used five stages to map the literature: identifying the research question; identifying relevant literature; study selection; charting the data; collating, summarizing, and reporting results. RESULTS: We identified 51 diverse classification schemes, including 23 taxonomies, 15 frameworks, 8 intervention lists, 3 models and 2 other formats. Most documents were public health based, 55% included a literature or document review, and 33% were theory based. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review provides an overview of schemes used to classify interventions which can be used for evaluation, comparison and validation of existing and emerging models. The collated taxonomies can guide authors in describing interventions; adequate descriptions of interventions will advance the science of knowledge translation in healthcare.

Towards a common terminology: a simplified framework of interventions to promote and integrate evidence into health practices, systems, and policies.

BACKGROUND: A wide range of diverse and inconsistent terminology exists in the field of knowledge translation. This limits the conduct of evidence syntheses, impedes communication and collaboration, and undermines knowledge translation of research findings in diverse settings. Improving uniformity of terminology could help address these challenges. In 2012, we convened an international working group to explore the idea of developing a common terminology and an overarching framework for knowledge translation interventions. FINDINGS: Methods included identifying and summarizing existing frameworks, mapping together a subset of those frameworks, and convening a multi-disciplinary group to begin working toward consensus. The group considered four potential approaches to creating a simplified framework: melding existing taxonomies, creating a framework of intervention mechanisms rather than intervention strategies, using a consensus process to expand one of the existing models/frameworks used by the group, or developing a new consensus framework. CONCLUSIONS: The work group elected to draft a new, simplified consensus framework of interventions to promote and integrate evidence into health practices, systems and policies. The framework will include four key components: strategies and techniques (active ingredients), how they function (causal mechanisms), how they are delivered (mode of delivery), and what they aim to change (intended targets). The draft framework needs to be further developed by feedback and consultation with the research community and tested for usefulness through application and evaluation.

Engaging with a Wiki related to knowledge translation: a survey of WhatisKT Wiki users.

BACKGROUND: In 2008, WhatisKT wiki was launched as a collaborative platform for knowledge translation (KT) researchers and stakeholders to debate the use and definitions of KT-related terms. The wiki has definitions for over 110 terms from disciplines including health care, information technology, education, accounting, and business. WhatisKT wiki has over 115 registered users. Approximately 73,000 unique visitors have visited the wiki since 2008. Despite annual increases in visitors and regular maintenance of the wiki, no visitors have contributed content or started a discussion. OBJECTIVE: We surveyed wiki users to gain an understanding of the perceived value of the website, reasons for not engaging in the wiki, and suggestions to facilitate collaboration and improve the usability of the wiki. METHODS: We surveyed three cohorts: KT Canada members who were previously invited to join the wiki, registered wiki members, and unregistered visitors. The first two cohorts completed a Web-based survey that included the System Usability Scale (SUS) questionnaire to assess usability; additionally 3 participants were interviewed. Unregistered wiki visitors were surveyed with polls posted on the wiki. The study received ethics approval from the McMaster University Faculty of Health Sciences Research Ethics Board. RESULTS: Twenty-three participants completed the Web-based and SUS surveys; 15 participants indicated that they would collaborate on the wiki. The mean SUS score of 67 (95% CI 56-77) indicated that the wiki could be considered for design improvements. Study participants indicated that the wiki could be improved by email notification regarding new terms, better grouping of terms, user friendly interface, and training for users interested in editing content. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this survey will be used to enhance the design and content of WhatisKT wiki. Further feedback from participants will be used to make the wiki an ideal collaboration platform for KT researchers interested in terminology.

Development of two shortened systematic review formats for clinicians.

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews provide evidence for clinical questions, however the literature suggests they are not used regularly by physicians for decision-making. A shortened systematic review format is proposed as one possible solution to address barriers, such as lack of time, experienced by busy clinicians. The purpose of this paper is to describe the development process of two shortened formats for a systematic review intended for use by primary care physicians as an information tool for clinical decision-making. METHODS: We developed prototypes for two formats (case-based and evidence-expertise) that represent a summary of a full-length systematic review before seeking input from end-users. The process was composed of the following four phases: 1) selection of a systematic review and creation of initial prototypes that represent a shortened version of the systematic review; 2) a mapping exercise to identify obstacles described by clinicians in using clinical evidence in decision-making; 3) a heuristic evaluation (a usability inspection method); and 4) a review of the clinical content in the prototypes. RESULTS: After the initial prototypes were created (Phase 1), the mapping exercise (Phase 2) identified components that prompted modifications. Similarly, the heuristic evaluation and the clinical content review (Phase 3 and Phase 4) uncovered necessary changes. Revisions were made to the prototypes based on the results. CONCLUSIONS: Documentation of the processes for developing products or tools provides essential information about how they are tailored for the intended user. One step has been described that we hope will increase usability and uptake of these documents to end-users.

Sustainability of knowledge translation interventions in healthcare decision-making: protocol for a scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Knowledge translation (KT also known as research utilisation, translational medicine and implementation science) is a dynamic and iterative process that includes the synthesis, dissemination, exchange and ethically sound application of knowledge to improve health. After the implementation of KT interventions, their impact on relevant outcomes should be monitored. The objectives of this scoping review are to: (1) conduct a systematic search of the literature to identify the impact on healthcare outcomes beyond 1 year, or beyond the termination of funding of the initiative of KT interventions targeting chronic disease management for end-users including patients, clinicians, public health officials, health services managers and policy-makers; (2) identify factors that influence sustainability of effective KT interventions; (3) identify how sustained change from KT interventions should be measured; and (4) develop a framework for assessing sustainability of KT interventions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Comprehensive searches of relevant electronic databases (eg, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), websites of funding agencies and websites of healthcare provider organisations will be conducted to identify relevant material. We will include experimental, quasi-experimental and observational studies providing information on the sustainability of KT interventions targeting chronic disease management in adults and focusing on end-users including patients, clinicians, public health officials, health services managers and policy-makers. Two reviewers will pilot-test the screening criteria and data abstraction form. They will then screen all citations, full articles and abstract data in duplicate independently. The results of the scoping review will be synthesised descriptively and used to develop a framework to assess the sustainability of KT interventions. DISCUSSION AND DISSEMINATION: Our results will help inform end-users (ie, patients, clinicians, public health officials, health services managers and policy-makers) regarding the sustainability of KT interventions. Our dissemination plan includes publications, presentations, website posting and a stakeholder meeting.

MEDLINE clinical queries are robust when searching in recent publishing years.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if the PubMed and Ovid MEDLINE clinical queries (which were developed in the publishing year 2000, for the purpose categories therapy, diagnosis, prognosis, etiology, and clinical prediction guides) perform as well when searching in current publishing years. METHODS: A gold standard database of recently published research literature was created using the McMaster health knowledge refinery (http://hiru.mcmaster.ca/hiru/HIRU_McMaster_HKR.aspx) and its continuously updated database, McMaster PLUS (http://hiru.mcmaster.ca/hiru/HIRU_McMaster_PLUS_projects.aspx). This database contains articles from over 120 clinical journals that are tagged for meeting or not meeting criteria for scientific merit and clinical relevance. The clinical queries sensitive ('broad') and specific ('narrow') search filters were tested in this gold standard database, and sensitivity and specificity were calculated and compared with those originally reported for the clinical queries. RESULTS: In all cases, the sensitivity of the highly sensitive search filters and the specificity of the highly specific search filters did not differ substantively when comparing results derived in 2000 with those derived in a more current database. In addition, in all cases, the specificities for the highly sensitive search filters and the sensitivities for the highly specific search filters remained above 50% when testing them in the current database. DISCUSSION: These results are reassuring for modern-day searchers. The clinical queries that were derived in the year 2000 perform equally well a decade later. CONCLUSION: The PubMed and Ovid MEDLINE clinical queries have been revalidated and remain a useful public resource for searching the world's medical literature for research that is most relevant to clinical care.

Glomerular disease search filters for Pubmed, Ovid Medline, and Embase: a development and validation study.

BACKGROUND: Tools to enhance physician searches of Medline and other bibliographic databases have potential to improve the application of new knowledge in patient care. This is particularly true for articles about glomerular disease, which are published across multiple disciplines and are often difficult to track down. Our objective was to develop and test search filters for PubMed, Ovid Medline, and Embase that allow physicians to search within a subset of the database to retrieve articles relevant to glomerular disease. METHODS: We used a diagnostic test assessment framework with development and validation phases. We read a total of 22,992 full text articles for relevance and assigned them to the development or validation set to define the reference standard. We then used combinations of search terms to develop 997,298 unique glomerular disease filters. Outcome measures for each filter included sensitivity, specificity, precision, and accuracy. We selected optimal sensitive and specific search filters for each database and applied them to the validation set to test performance. RESULTS: High performance filters achieved at least 93.8% sensitivity and specificity in the development set. Filters optimized for sensitivity reached at least 96.7% sensitivity and filters optimized for specificity reached at least 98.4% specificity. Performance of these filters was consistent in the validation set and similar among all three databases. CONCLUSIONS: PubMed, Ovid Medline, and Embase can be filtered for articles relevant to glomerular disease in a reliable manner. These filters can now be used to facilitate physician searching.

Search filters can find some but not all knowledge translation articles in MEDLINE: an analytic survey.

OBJECTIVE: Advances from health research are not well applied giving rise to over- and underuse of resources and inferior care. Knowledge translation (KT), actions and processes of getting research findings used in practice, can improve research application. The KT literature is difficult to find because of nonstandardized terminology, rapid evolution of the field, and it is spread across several domains. We created multiple search filters to retrieve KT articles from MEDLINE. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Analytic survey using articles from 12 journals tagged as having KT content and also as describing a KT application or containing a KT theory. RESULTS: Of 2,594 articles, 579 were KT articles of which 201 were about KT applications and 152 about KT theory. Search filter sensitivity (retrieval efficiency) maximized at 83%-94% with specificity (no retrieval of irrelevant material) approximately 50%. Filter performances were enhanced with multiple terms, but these filters often had reduced specificity. Performance was higher for KT applications and KT theory articles. These filters can select KT material although many irrelevant articles also will be retrieved. CONCLUSION: KT search filters were developed and tested, with good sensitivity but suboptimal specificity. Further research must improve their performance.

Impact of PubMed search filters on the retrieval of evidence by physicians.

BACKGROUND: Physicians face challenges when searching PubMed for research evidence, and they may miss relevant articles while retrieving too many nonrelevant articles. We investigated whether the use of search filters in PubMed improves searching by physicians. METHODS: We asked a random sample of Canadian nephrologists to answer unique clinical questions derived from 100 systematic reviews of renal therapy. Physicians provided the search terms that they would type into PubMed to locate articles to answer these questions. We entered the physician-provided search terms into PubMed and applied two types of search filters alone or in combination: a methods-based filter designed to identify high-quality studies about treatment (clinical queries "therapy") and a topic-based filter designed to identify studies with renal content. We evaluated the comprehensiveness (proportion of relevant articles found) and efficiency (ratio of relevant to nonrelevant articles) of the filtered and nonfiltered searches. Primary studies included in the systematic reviews served as the reference standard for relevant articles. RESULTS: The average physician-provided search terms retrieved 46% of the relevant articles, while 6% of the retrieved articles were relevant (corrected) (the ratio of relevant to nonrelevant articles was 1:16). The use of both filters together produced a marked improvement in efficiency, resulting in a ratio of relevant to nonrelevant articles of 1:5 (16 percentage point improvement; 99% confidence interval 9% to 22%; p < 0.003) with no substantive change in comprehensiveness (44% of relevant articles found; p = 0.55). INTERPRETATION: The use of PubMed search filters improves the efficiency of physician searches. Improved search performance may enhance the transfer of research into practice and improve patient care.

How well are journal and clinical article characteristics associated with the journal impact factor? a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Journal impact factor (JIF) is often used as a measure of journal quality. A retrospective cohort study determined the ability of clinical article and journal characteristics, including appraisal measures collected at the time of publication, to predict subsequent JIFs. METHODS: Clinical research articles that passed methods quality criteria were included. Each article was rated for relevance and newsworthiness by 3 to 24 physicians from a panel of more than 4,000 practicing clinicians. The 1,267 articles (from 103 journals) were divided 60∶40 into derivation (760 articles) and validation sets (507 articles), representing 99 and 88 journals, respectively. A multiple regression model was produced determining the association of 10 journal and article measures with the 2007 JIF. RESULTS: Four of the 10 measures were significant in the regression model: number of authors, number of databases indexing the journal, proportion of articles passing methods criteria, and mean clinical newsworthiness scores. With the number of disciplines rating the article, the 5 variables accounted for 61% of the variation in JIF (R(2) = 0.607, 95% CI 0.444 to 0.706, P<0.001). CONCLUSION: For the clinical literature, measures of scientific quality and clinical newsworthiness available at the time of publication can predict JIFs with 60% accuracy.

The economics of health information technology in medication management: a systematic review of economic evaluations.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review and synthesis of the evidence surrounding the cost-effectiveness of health information technology (HIT) in the medication process. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Peer-reviewed electronic databases and gray literature were searched to identify studies on HIT used to assist in the medication management process. Articles including an economic component were reviewed for further screening. For this review, full cost-effectiveness analyses, cost-utility analyses and cost-benefit analyses, as well as cost analyses, were eligible for inclusion and synthesis. RESULTS: The 31 studies included were heterogeneous with respect to the HIT evaluated, setting, and economic methods used. Thus the data could not be synthesized, and a narrative review was conducted. Most studies evaluated computer decision support systems in hospital settings in the USA, and only five of the studied performed full economic evaluations. DISCUSSION: Most studies merely provided cost data; however, useful economic data involves far more input. A full economic evaluation includes a full enumeration of the costs, synthesized with the outcomes of the intervention. CONCLUSION: The quality of the economic literature in this area is poor. A few studies found that HIT may offer cost advantages despite their increased acquisition costs. However, given the uncertainty that surrounds the costs and outcomes data, and limited study designs, it is difficult to reach any definitive conclusion as to whether the additional costs and benefits represent value for money. Sophisticated concurrent prospective economic evaluations need to be conducted to address whether HIT interventions in the medication management process are cost-effective.

The effectiveness of integrated health information technologies across the phases of medication management: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: The US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality funded an evidence report to address seven questions on multiple aspects of the effectiveness of medication management information technology (MMIT) and its components (prescribing, order communication, dispensing, administering, and monitoring). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Medline and 11 other databases without language or date limitations to mid-2010. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing integrated MMIT were selected by two independent reviewers. Reviewers assessed study quality and extracted data. Senior staff checked accuracy. RESULTS: Most of the 87 RCTs focused on clinical decision support and computerized provider order entry systems, were performed in hospitals and clinics, included primarily physicians and sometimes nurses but not other health professionals, and studied process changes related to prescribing and monitoring medication. Processes of care improved for prescribing and monitoring mostly in hospital settings, but the few studies measuring clinical outcomes showed small or no improvements. Studies were performed most frequently in the USA (n=63), Europe (n=16), and Canada (n=6). DISCUSSION: Many studies had limited description of systems, installations, institutions, and targets of the intervention. Problems with methods and analyses were also found. Few studies addressed order communication, dispensing, or administering, non-physician prescribers or pharmacists and their MMIT tools, or patients and caregivers. Other study methods are also needed to completely understand the effects of MMIT. CONCLUSIONS: Almost half of MMIT interventions improved the process of care, but few studies measured clinical outcomes. This large body of literature, although instructive, is not uniformly distributed across settings, people, medication phases, or outcomes.

Core competencies in the science and practice of knowledge translation: description of a Canadian strategic training initiative.

BACKGROUND: Globally, healthcare systems are attempting to optimize quality of care. This challenge has resulted in the development of implementation science or knowledge translation (KT) and the resulting need to build capacity in both the science and practice of KT. FINDINGS: We are attempting to meet these challenges through the creation of a national training initiative in KT. We have identified core competencies in this field and have developed a series of educational courses and materials for three training streams. We report the outline for this approach and the progress to date. CONCLUSIONS: We have prepared a strategy to develop, implement, and evaluate a national training initiative to build capacity in the science and practice of KT. Ultimately through this initiative, we hope to meet the capacity demand for KT researchers and practitioners in Canada that will lead to improved care and a strengthened healthcare system.