PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
BACKGROUND: The existing evidence base indicates increased interest in knowledge translation (KT), or, the dissemination of research to ensure uptake and impact. Given this definition, this study aimed to review existing scholarship on knowledge translation (KT) of health research to people living with disabilities (PLWD), and assess the current state of accessibility of health knowledge for people living with disabilities.
METHODS: Given existing heterogeneity in literature as well as a number of varying definitions for both disability and knowledge translation, a reflexive, three-phase approach was utilized to improve methodological soundness. Phase I recognizes that existing review-style studies have been conducted on disability-KT. An existing systematic review on KT specific to the field of rehabilitation and physical medicine was analyzed to assess potential best practices towards inclusivity and accessibility for people living with disability. Phase II used the Center on Knowledge Translation for Disability and Rehabilitation Research (KTDRR) database as an information-source with high-specificity to disability-health KT. Phase III sought to rapidly assess the current landscape of systematic reviews relevant to disability-health KT, with four systematic reviews meeting the inclusion criteria across Cochrane, Psycinfo, CINAHL, PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE.
RESULTS: The current landscape of disability-health KT is primarily targeted at health professionals who serve PLWD. PLWD are included in KT, mostly as key informants, or as study participants in KT-studies designed as health interventions. Multiple systematic reviews on disability-health KT exist, presenting vastly different foci which prevent assessment of best practices.
CONCLUSIONS: KT efforts are abundant and can be seen across health research related to disabilities, generating considerable literature and systematic reviews. With regards to meeting the public health objective of equalizing and enhancing access to health knowledge, future knowledge translation efforts intending to provide PLWD with up-to-date health research can be of significant value.
METHODS: Given existing heterogeneity in literature as well as a number of varying definitions for both disability and knowledge translation, a reflexive, three-phase approach was utilized to improve methodological soundness. Phase I recognizes that existing review-style studies have been conducted on disability-KT. An existing systematic review on KT specific to the field of rehabilitation and physical medicine was analyzed to assess potential best practices towards inclusivity and accessibility for people living with disability. Phase II used the Center on Knowledge Translation for Disability and Rehabilitation Research (KTDRR) database as an information-source with high-specificity to disability-health KT. Phase III sought to rapidly assess the current landscape of systematic reviews relevant to disability-health KT, with four systematic reviews meeting the inclusion criteria across Cochrane, Psycinfo, CINAHL, PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE.
RESULTS: The current landscape of disability-health KT is primarily targeted at health professionals who serve PLWD. PLWD are included in KT, mostly as key informants, or as study participants in KT-studies designed as health interventions. Multiple systematic reviews on disability-health KT exist, presenting vastly different foci which prevent assessment of best practices.
CONCLUSIONS: KT efforts are abundant and can be seen across health research related to disabilities, generating considerable literature and systematic reviews. With regards to meeting the public health objective of equalizing and enhancing access to health knowledge, future knowledge translation efforts intending to provide PLWD with up-to-date health research can be of significant value.
摘要：
背景：现有的证据库表明对知识翻译（KT）的兴趣增加，或者，传播研究，以确保吸收和影响。鉴于这个定义，本研究旨在回顾现有的关于残疾人健康研究知识翻译(KT)的奖学金(PLWD)，并评估残疾人健康知识的可及性现状。
方法：鉴于文献中现有的异质性以及残疾和知识翻译的许多不同定义，一个反身，采用三阶段方法来提高方法学的健全性。第一阶段认识到已经对残疾KT进行了现有的审查风格研究。分析了针对康复和物理医学领域的KT的现有系统综述，以评估残疾人包容性和可及性的潜在最佳实践。第二阶段使用残疾和康复研究知识翻译中心（KTDRR）数据库作为对残疾健康KT具有高度特异性的信息来源。第三阶段寻求快速评估与残疾健康相关的系统评价的现状，有四项系统评价符合Cochrane的纳入标准，Psycinfo,CINAHL,PubMed,WebofScience,和EMBASE。
结果：目前的残疾健康KT主要针对为PLWD服务的卫生专业人员。PLWD包含在KT中，主要是作为关键线人，或作为设计为健康干预措施的KT研究的研究参与者。关于残疾健康KT存在多个系统评价，呈现截然不同的焦点，阻碍了对最佳实践的评估。
结论：KT的努力是丰富的，可以在与残疾有关的健康研究中看到，产生大量的文献和系统的评论。关于实现平等和增加获得健康知识的公共卫生目标，旨在为PLWD提供最新的健康研究的未来知识翻译工作可能具有重要价值。
方法：鉴于文献中现有的异质性以及残疾和知识翻译的许多不同定义，一个反身，采用三阶段方法来提高方法学的健全性。第一阶段认识到已经对残疾KT进行了现有的审查风格研究。分析了针对康复和物理医学领域的KT的现有系统综述，以评估残疾人包容性和可及性的潜在最佳实践。第二阶段使用残疾和康复研究知识翻译中心（KTDRR）数据库作为对残疾健康KT具有高度特异性的信息来源。第三阶段寻求快速评估与残疾健康相关的系统评价的现状，有四项系统评价符合Cochrane的纳入标准，Psycinfo,CINAHL,PubMed,WebofScience,和EMBASE。
结果：目前的残疾健康KT主要针对为PLWD服务的卫生专业人员。PLWD包含在KT中，主要是作为关键线人，或作为设计为健康干预措施的KT研究的研究参与者。关于残疾健康KT存在多个系统评价，呈现截然不同的焦点，阻碍了对最佳实践的评估。
结论：KT的努力是丰富的，可以在与残疾有关的健康研究中看到，产生大量的文献和系统的评论。关于实现平等和增加获得健康知识的公共卫生目标，旨在为PLWD提供最新的健康研究的未来知识翻译工作可能具有重要价值。
