knowledge exchange and implementation

New research findings are meaningless if they do not find their way into the hands of those who can use them. At the PIRL we have long been involved in rigorous systematic reviews and meta-analyses, starting initially with identifying the most consistent ‘risk variables’ for identifying those with acute whiplash most unlikely to recover. Since that time, other reviews and knowledge syntheses have been conducted for occupational low back pain, and recovery from upper extremity injuries and surgeries.

More recently we are working on additional methods for optimizing impact and uptake of new research findings. These include a focus on implementation science frameworks including the development of a new toolkit for implementing clinical research findings, stronger integration of patient partners and knowledge end-users in research design and interpretation, and a recent description of a new method for understanding the inclusion/exclusion criteria of primary sources in knowledge synthesis products. We are continuing to prioritize strong team-based science and sharing new research findings through social media, the PIRL website, articles in both scientific journals and lay newsmagazines, books, and provision of continuing professional development workshops and courses.