Encouraging collaborations
between researchers and
commissioners:
A qualitative evaluation of a knowledge
mobilisation initiative
Lesley Wye, NIHR Knowledge Mobilisation fellow
Helen Baxter
(University of Bristol)
Jude Carey
(Bristol Clinical Commissioning Group)
Rachel Anthwal
(South West Commissioning Support Unit)
School of
SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY MEDICINE
University of
BRISTOL
The problem
 £8 billion spent annually on health
research (2% HSR)
 The rise of REF – how do we
demonstrate impact?
 Types of knowledge produced:
Scientific
 Practical

 Over-prioritisation of scientific at
expense of practical? (excellence versus
relevance)
School of
SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY MEDICINE
University of
BRISTOL
The apple orchard
School of
SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY MEDICINE
University of
BRISTOL
The problem (2)
 Research-practice gap
 3 approaches to bridging that gap:
Researcher ‘push’ (or knowledge transfer)
 User ‘pull’
 Interaction, linkage & exchange

 Literature consistently suggests that
personal contact b/t researchers &
policymakers most effective
School of
SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY MEDICINE
University of
BRISTOL
Knowledge mobilisation
Making knowledge readily
accessible and useful to
individuals and groups by
developing ways to work
collaboratively
School of
SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY MEDICINE
University of
BRISTOL
The intervention
 Developing commissioners as
knowledge brokers to:
Disseminate research findings to nonacademic audiences (push)
 Facilitate co-produced evaluations (pull)
 Develop relationships b/t
commissioners & researchers
(interaction)

School of
SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY MEDICINE
University of
BRISTOL
Knowledge mobilisation team
NHS fellows
Rachel Anthwal, CSU Jude Carey, CCG
2013-2014
2013-2014
James Rooney, CSU
Becca Robinson, CCG
Researchers in residence
Helen Baxter
Helen Cramer
School of
SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY MEDICINE
University of
BRISTOL
What did they actually do?
 NHS fellows attached to research teams
 Planned & carried out dissemination activities such
as workshops, briefing papers, non-academic
conferences, You Tube videos, Twitter
 Undertook primary research (interviews &
observations)
 Identify & introduce commissioners and researchers
 Explained NHS landscape
 Spoke at 10 seminars in 14 months to commissioners
& researchers
School of
SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY MEDICINE
University of
BRISTOL
The evaluation
 Formative evaluation
 Realistic evaluation framework

What works for whom and in what circumstances?
 19 interviews in May/ June 2014 mid/end fellowship


13 researchers
6 commissioners
 Data analysed deductively using framework analysis
by Lesley Wye and Helen Baxter
School of
SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY MEDICINE
University of
BRISTOL
Key findings
1. NHS fellows “efficiently” and “quickly” helped
researchers to access the commissioners needed.
2. Most successful encounters occurred when
researchers acknowledged that the knowledge held
by commissioners was of equal value to that held by
researchers.
3. Allocating a NHS fellow with dedicated time for
dissemination helped to “galvanise” research groups
and taught researchers dissemination skills
School of
SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY MEDICINE
University of
BRISTOL
Key findings (2)
4. The brokerage role of Lesley Wye was key.
5. Personal qualities & knowledge of NHS fellows
valued, especially deep understanding of local NHS.
6. Possible improvements included better explanation
of scope & role of NHS fellows and regular feedback
mechanisms.
7. Researchers gained more than commissioners,
because the NHS fellows were located in the
university working with research teams.
School of
SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY MEDICINE
University of
BRISTOL
Benefits claimed by researchers
 Increased understanding of
commissioning which led to:
More confidence in approaching
commissioners
 Knowledge of local developments in the
researchers’ area of interest
 Accessing the language to write more
convincing bids

School of
SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY MEDICINE
University of
BRISTOL
Benefits claimed by researchers (2)
 Improved understanding of and skills in
knowledge mobilisation which
contributed to:
Raised awareness of its importance
amongst the wider research team
 Delivering dissemination activities to the
public and commissioners for current (and
potentially future) studies

School of
SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY MEDICINE
University of
BRISTOL
Even just their presence, passing them in
the corridor, you know, and reminding
you “I must just think about
commissioners going forward, I must
build that into my proposal”. It’s kind of a
prompt to really keep including it in the
process. (Researcher 15)
School of
SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY MEDICINE
University of
BRISTOL
Limitations
 LW as manager & evaluator of
interviews with own colleagues
 Hard to get less positive researcher
views
 Too few commissioners included
School of
SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY MEDICINE
University of
BRISTOL
Conclusions
Sowing the seeds…
 In general, those interviewed were very
positive about the scheme.
 Is this a useful way of fostering
commissioner-researcher interaction?
 What is the relationship of increased
interaction to the influence of research(ers)
on commissioning decisions?
More research needed!
School of
SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY MEDICINE
University of
BRISTOL
Acknowledgments
 Avon Primary Care Research Collaborative
for funding the NHS fellows and the
evaluation
 All participants
 FFI: [email protected] or
[email protected]
School of
SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY MEDICINE
University of
BRISTOL