Revisiting the Pop Health KT Literature -- Filling the Gaps
Class Held In Person
Key questions:
What guidance does the mainstream Pop Health KT literature provide for designing and implementing high quality KT strategies?
What guidance remains missing?
How can thinking about power, thinking like a movement, and thinking like a marketer address those gaps and/or address the five anxieties in the mainstream literature?
What other material/information may be beneficial when trying to fill those gaps?
Revisiting the mainstream pop health KT literature we have already examined, along with some key articles they have cited.
In class activity:
Feedback re Assignment 3.
Students will reflect on the mainstream population health KT papers that we have already read during the course of the semester.
Collectively, students will develop a Google Doc that summarizes key points from each of the mainstream pop health KT articles that we have discussed in class, and identify which of the five anxieties appear in these articles. This Google Doc will become a shared resource for all students in the class as you prepare your KT Field Guides as Assignment 4. These Field Guideswill require you to provide citations for examples of the five anxieties. Pairs of students will be responsible for presenting 3-5 minute summaries for each of the readings below.
- Graham, Ian D, et al. 2006. "Lost in Knowledge Translation: Time for a Map?" The Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions 26 (1):13-24.
- Brown, Theodore M, and Elizabeth Fee. 2014. "Social Movements in Health." Annual Review of Public Health 35:385–398.
- Kershaw, Paul, Eric Swanson and Andrea Stucchi. 2016. “A surgical intervention for the body politic: Generation Squeeze applies the Advocacy Coalition Framework to social determinants of health knowledge translation Links to an external site..” Canadian Journal of Public Health. 108(2):e199–e204
- Kershaw, Paul and Verena Rossa-Roccor. 2022. “Overcoming 5 Anxieties of Knowledge Translation (KT): Trusting Social Science More to Guide Health Policy KT. Under Review in Health Promotion International.
- Oliver, Kathryn and Paul Cairney. 2019. “The dos and don’ts of influencing policy: a systematic review of advice to academics.” Palgrave Communications 5:21: https://doi.org/10.1057 /s41599-019-0232-y
- Fafard, Patrick and Steven J Hoffman. 2020. “Rethinking knowledge translation for public health policy, Evidence & Policy 16:1, 165-175.
- Mitton, Craig, et al. 2007. "Knowledge Transfer and Exchange: Review and Synthesis of the Literature." The Milbank Quarterly 85 (4):729-768.
- Contandriopoulos, Damien, et al. 2010. "Knowledge Exchange Processes in Organizations and Policy Arenas: A Narrative Systematic Review of the Literature." The Milbank Quarterly 88 (4):444-483.
- Green, Lawrence W, et al. 2009. "Diffusion Theory and Knowledge Dissemination Utilization, and Integration in Public Health." Annual Review of Public Health 30:151–74.
- Clavier, Carole, and Evelyne de Leeuw. 2013. "Framing public policy in health promotion: ubiquitous, yet elusive." In Health Promotion and the Policy Process, edited by Carole Clavier and Evelyne de Leeuw, 1-22. Oxford: Oxford Unviersity Press. Available online at UBC library.
- Raphael, Dennis. 2015. "Beyond policy analysis: the raw politics behind opposition to healthy public policy." Health Promotion International 30 (2):380-396.
- Greenhalgh, Trisha, and Jill Russell. 2006. "Reframing Evidence Synthesis As Rhetorical Action in the Policy Making Drama." Healthcare Policy 1 (2):34-42.
- Kreuter, Matthew W, and Jay M Bernhardt. 2009. "Reframing the Dissemination Challenge: A Marketing and Distribution Perspective." American Journal of Public Health 99 (12):2123-2127.
December 14: Final assignment due by 9am. Submit to Rayner, pj.rayner@ubc.ca with subject “SPPH 581N 2022 Assignment 4.”