Implementation and efficacy of knowledge translation frameworks in family focused nursing care: A scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To provide an overview of the characteristics, variety and outcomes of knowledge translation (KT) strategies used in nursing care involving adult patients and their family members. BACKGROUND: The gap in providing family nursing practice could be due to a lack of explicit KT frameworks and understanding of ways to translate evidence-based knowledge into clinical practice. DESIGN: A scoping review conducted according to the Joanna Briggs Institute. METHODS: The review is reported according to PRISMA-ScR. Relevant studies were searched in MEDLINE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL Complete, ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health Premium, PsycINFO, Social Work Abstracts, Social Services Abstracts and Scopus. Grey literature was searched in ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. Search results were imported into the web-based programme Covidence. Studies describing concepts of KT, strategies of implementation, involvement of families and nurses/family caregivers in adult health care and conducted within the last 15 years were included. RESULTS: Eight studies met the inclusion criteria. Three studies used the KTA Framework to guide the implementation process. The remaining five studies used different frameworks/guidelines to translate a variety of family focused interventions into their clinical practice. Translation strategies were often targeted towards nurse education. Reported outcomes included nurses' attitudes towards and acceptance of involving families in health care. The outcomes were conceptualized and measured differently, showing inconclusive results on effectiveness on family focused care and family health. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE: The application of KT frameworks to implement evidence-based family nursing into clinical practice is limited. The process of KT mainly targets at nurses' adoption of family focused interventions with limited information about short-, intermediate- and long-term efficacy on family health. Clinical leaders should consider time and resources needed to implement family focused care KT strategies before putting it into practice. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No Patient or Public Contribution. Data were obtained from other's literature.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".