Kara DeCorby
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
Kara DeCorby has a total of 24 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Alison Margaret Hutchinson
Deakin University
2 shared publications - Brendan McCormack
Institute of Nursing Research/School of Nursing, University of Ulster, Shore Road, Newtownabbey, Co. Antrim, Northern Ireland
2 shared publications - Cheryl B. Stetler
Independent Consultant, Amherst, Massachusetts, USA
2 shared publications - Erna Snelgrove-Clarke
School of Nursing, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
2 shared publications - Jo Rycroft-Malone
Faculty of Health and Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
2 shared publications - Marita G. Titler
University of Michigan School of Nursing, 400 North Ingalls, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-5482, United States
2 shared publications
Latest Publications
- Open Access
- 1 January 2015
- Published by Bristol University Press in Evidence & Policy
- Vol. 11 (1) , 99-109
Challenges of partnership research: insights from a collaborative partnership in evidence-informed public health decision making
The investment of decision makers in research can increase the likelihood that relevant and timely practice-based research questions are asked and that these findings are readily taken up into policy and practice. While many positive benefits may be gained from this type of research, various challenges may also arise along the way. These include: unpredictable practice settings and a change in priorities or study focus over time; time and staff workload; decision maker research knowledge and experience; and balancing applied research with good scientific practice. In this paper, we discuss these challenges and offer recommendations for overcoming them.
- 1 January 2015
- Published by Bristol University Press in Evidence & Policy
- Vol. 11 (1) , 99-109
Open AccessChallenges of partnership research: insights from a collaborative partnership in evidence-informed public health decision making
The investment of decision makers in research can increase the likelihood that relevant and timely practice-based research questions are asked and that these findings are readily taken up into policy and practice. While many positive benefits may be gained from this type of research, various challenges may also arise along the way. These include: unpredictable practice settings and a change in priorities or study focus over time; time and staff workload; decision maker research knowledge and experience; and balancing applied research with good scientific practice. In this paper, we discuss these challenges and offer recommendations for overcoming them.
- Open Access
- 8 September 2013
- Published by Springer Nature in Implementation Science
- Vol. 8 (1) , 107
A realist review of interventions and strategies to promote evidence-informed healthcare: a focus on change agency
Background: Change agency in its various forms is one intervention aimed at improving the effectiveness of the uptake of evidence. Facilitators, knowledge brokers and opinion leaders are examples of change agency strategies used to promote knowledge utilization. This review adopts a realist approach and addresses the following question: What change agency characteristics work, for whom do they work, in what circumstances and why? Methods: The literature reviewed spanned the period 1997-2007. Change agency was operationalized as roles that are aimed at effecting successful change in individuals and organizations. A theoretical framework, developed through stakeholder consultation formed the basis for a search for relevant literature. Team members, working in sub groups, independently themed the data and developed chains of inference to form a series of hypotheses regarding change agency and the role of change agency in knowledge use. Results: 24, 478 electronic references were initially returned from search strategies. Preliminary screening of the article titles reduced the list of potentially relevant papers to 196. A review of full document versions of potentially relevant papers resulted in a final list of 52 papers. The findings add to the knowledge of change agency as they raise issues pertaining to how change agents’ function, how individual change agent characteristics effect evidence-informed health care, the influence of interaction between the change agent and the setting and the overall effect of change agency on knowledge utilization. Particular issues are raised such as how accessibility of the change agent, their cultural compatibility and their attitude mediate overall effectiveness. Findings also indicate the importance of promoting reflection on practice and role modeling. The findings of this study are limited by the complexity and diversity of the change agency literature, poor indexing of literature and a lack of theory-driven approaches. Conclusion: This is the first realist review of change agency. Though effectiveness evidence is weak, change agent roles are evolving, as is the literature, which requires more detailed description of interventions, outcomes measures, the context, intensity, and levels at which interventions are implemented in order to understand how change agent interventions effect evidence-informed health care.
- 8 September 2013
- Published by Springer Nature in Implementation Science
- Vol. 8 (1) , 107
Open AccessA realist review of interventions and strategies to promote evidence-informed healthcare: a focus on change agency
Background: Change agency in its various forms is one intervention aimed at improving the effectiveness of the uptake of evidence. Facilitators, knowledge brokers and opinion leaders are examples of change agency strategies used to promote knowledge utilization. This review adopts a realist approach and addresses the following question: What change agency characteristics work, for whom do they work, in what circumstances and why? Methods: The literature reviewed spanned the period 1997-2007. Change agency was operationalized as roles that are aimed at effecting successful change in individuals and organizations. A theoretical framework, developed through stakeholder consultation formed the basis for a search for relevant literature. Team members, working in sub groups, independently themed the data and developed chains of inference to form a series of hypotheses regarding change agency and the role of change agency in knowledge use. Results: 24, 478 electronic references were initially returned from search strategies. Preliminary screening of the article titles reduced the list of potentially relevant papers to 196. A review of full document versions of potentially relevant papers resulted in a final list of 52 papers. The findings add to the knowledge of change agency as they raise issues pertaining to how change agents’ function, how individual change agent characteristics effect evidence-informed health care, the influence of interaction between the change agent and the setting and the overall effect of change agency on knowledge utilization. Particular issues are raised such as how accessibility of the change agent, their cultural compatibility and their attitude mediate overall effectiveness. Findings also indicate the importance of promoting reflection on practice and role modeling. The findings of this study are limited by the complexity and diversity of the change agency literature, poor indexing of literature and a lack of theory-driven approaches. Conclusion: This is the first realist review of change agency. Though effectiveness evidence is weak, change agent roles are evolving, as is the literature, which requires more detailed description of interventions, outcomes measures, the context, intensity, and levels at which interventions are implemented in order to understand how change agent interventions effect evidence-informed health care.
- Top Cited PapersOpen Access
- 19 April 2012
- Published by Springer Nature in Implementation Science
- Vol. 7 (1) , 33
Realist synthesis: illustrating the method for implementation research
Realist synthesis is an increasingly popular approach to the review and synthesis of evidence, which focuses on understanding the mechanisms by which an intervention works (or not). There are few published examples of realist synthesis. This paper therefore fills a gap by describing, in detail, the process used for a realist review and synthesis to answer the question ‘what interventions and strategies are effective in enabling evidence-informed healthcare?’ The strengths and challenges of conducting realist review are also considered.
- 19 April 2012
- Published by Springer Nature in Implementation Science
- Vol. 7 (1) , 33
Top Cited PapersOpen AccessRealist synthesis: illustrating the method for implementation research
Realist synthesis is an increasingly popular approach to the review and synthesis of evidence, which focuses on understanding the mechanisms by which an intervention works (or not). There are few published examples of realist synthesis. This paper therefore fills a gap by describing, in detail, the process used for a realist review and synthesis to answer the question ‘what interventions and strategies are effective in enabling evidence-informed healthcare?’ The strengths and challenges of conducting realist review are also considered.
- Open Access
- 23 September 2009
- Published by Springer Nature in Implementation Science
- Vol. 4 (1) , 1-16
A randomized controlled trial evaluating the impact of knowledge translation and exchange strategies
Significant resources and time are invested in the production of research knowledge. The primary objective of this randomized controlled trial was to evaluate the effectiveness of three knowledge translation and exchange strategies in the incorporation of research evidence into public health policies and programs. This trial was conducted with a national sample of public health departments in Canada from 2004 to 2006. The three interventions, implemented over one year in 2005, included access to an online registry of research evidence; tailored messaging; and a knowledge broker. The primary outcome assessed the extent to which research evidence was used in a recent program decision, and the secondary outcome measured the change in the sum of evidence-informed healthy body weight promotion policies or programs being delivered at health departments. Mixed-effects models were used to test the hypotheses. One hundred and eight of 141 (77%) health departments participated in this study. No significant effect of the intervention was observed for primary outcome (p < 0.45). However, for public health policies and programs (HPPs), a significant effect of the intervention was observed only for tailored, targeted messages (p < 0.01). The treatment effect was moderated by organizational research culture (e.g., value placed on research evidence in decision making). The results of this study suggest that under certain conditions tailored, targeted messages are more effective than knowledge brokering and access to an online registry of research evidence. Greater emphasis on the identification of organizational factors is needed in order to implement strategies that best meet the needs of individual organizations. The trial registration number and title are as follows: ISRCTN35240937 -- Is a knowledge broker more effective than other strategies in promoting evidence-based physical activity and healthy body weight programming?
- 23 September 2009
- Published by Springer Nature in Implementation Science
- Vol. 4 (1) , 1-16
Open AccessA randomized controlled trial evaluating the impact of knowledge translation and exchange strategies
Significant resources and time are invested in the production of research knowledge. The primary objective of this randomized controlled trial was to evaluate the effectiveness of three knowledge translation and exchange strategies in the incorporation of research evidence into public health policies and programs. This trial was conducted with a national sample of public health departments in Canada from 2004 to 2006. The three interventions, implemented over one year in 2005, included access to an online registry of research evidence; tailored messaging; and a knowledge broker. The primary outcome assessed the extent to which research evidence was used in a recent program decision, and the secondary outcome measured the change in the sum of evidence-informed healthy body weight promotion policies or programs being delivered at health departments. Mixed-effects models were used to test the hypotheses. One hundred and eight of 141 (77%) health departments participated in this study. No significant effect of the intervention was observed for primary outcome (p < 0.45). However, for public health policies and programs (HPPs), a significant effect of the intervention was observed only for tailored, targeted messages (p < 0.01). The treatment effect was moderated by organizational research culture (e.g., value placed on research evidence in decision making). The results of this study suggest that under certain conditions tailored, targeted messages are more effective than knowledge brokering and access to an online registry of research evidence. Greater emphasis on the identification of organizational factors is needed in order to implement strategies that best meet the needs of individual organizations. The trial registration number and title are as follows: ISRCTN35240937 -- Is a knowledge broker more effective than other strategies in promoting evidence-based physical activity and healthy body weight programming?