1. School of SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY MEDICINE University of BRISTOL 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)

2. 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)

3. School of SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY MEDICINE University of BRISTOL The apple orchard

4. 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

5. 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

6. School of SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY MEDICINE University of BRISTOL The intervention  Developing commissioners as knowledge brokers to:  Disseminate research findings to non- academic audiences (push)  Facilitate co-produced evaluations (pull)  Develop relationships b/t commissioners & researchers (interaction)

7. School of SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY MEDICINE University of BRISTOL Knowledge mobilisation team NHS fellows Researchers in residence Rachel Anthwal, CSU 2013-2014 Helen Baxter Helen Cramer Jude Carey, CCG 2013-2014 James Rooney, CSU Becca Robinson, CCG

8. 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

9. 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

10. 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

11. 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.

12. 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

13. 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

14. 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)

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

16. 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!

17. 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: lesley.wye@bristol.ac.uk or helen.baxter@bristol.ac.u klesley.wye@bristol.ac.uk helen.baxter@bristol.ac.u k