Table 3 GET-FACTS IKT outcomes

1) Knowledge to action

 ♦ Scientists describe IKT as having positive impacts on dissemination of research findings, including: networks enhance dissemination (3/12), research is more useful and applicable (3/12), and information is disseminated more accurately (1/12)

 ♦ Limited number of scientists identify change in the research focus (1/12) and process (2/12) from connecting with steering committee. Reasons included: too early to tell, feedback was positive, nature of study cannot be changed

 ♦ Limited number of scientists identify change in KT practices from steering committee connections (2/12) and no (0/12) scientists identify improved access to resources such as patients or samples

 ♦ Steering committee members describe IKT as impacting the eventual dissemination of GET-FACTS research (knowledge-users participate in dissemination process, dissemination is more relevant, new networks are reached with this information) (7/8) but describe it being too soon for dissemination of research information (2/3)

 ♦ Steering committee members describe participation in IKT process as making them more confident in educating others (4/8)

 ♦ Steering committee members describe having a better understanding of the scientific process (5/8)

 ♦ Steering committee members describe IKT as having an impact on the general work produced through the project (4/8), with some specifically noting an impact on the work produced by scientists as informed by knowledge-users (3/8) and more relevant/meaningful (2/8)

 ♦ Steering committee members identify knowledge-users as having informed the GET-FACTS research process (3/8) and some identify this research as more meaningful/relevant because of this (2/8)

2) Laying the groundwork

 ♦ Scientists reference relationships built between scientists and knowledge-users as a marker of success from the project (8/12)

 ♦ Scientists identified either new (3/12) or strengthened (4/12) relationships with knowledge-user organizations

 ♦ Scientists identify steering committee relationships as motivating or shaping interests in the research area (4/12)

 ♦ Scientists are able to describe the GET-FACTS IKT approach with a lot (4/12) or some (4/12) familiarity and detail

 ♦ No scientists (0/12) identified at the time of interview having next research opportunities or collaborations stemming from work with steering committee

 ♦ All steering committee members said they either formed new relationships (5/8) and/or strengthened existing relationships (4/8) among knowledge-user organizations

 ♦ Steering committee members are able to describe the GET-FACTS IKT approach with a lot (4/8) or some (4/8) familiarity and detail

 ♦ Steering committee members describe utility of IKT approaches generally or PMF specifically for other work they are doing (3/8)

3) Changing the culture

 ♦ All scientists (12/12) are able to critically describe advantages and challenges to doing IKT work. Advantages most cited: integrates multiple perspective (9/12), knowledge-users receive more accurate information (4/12), research is more meaningful to knowledge-users (4/12), knowledge-users are aware of the research process (3/12). Challenges most cited: difficult to integrate multiple perspectives (6/12), required time investment (4/12), challenge in communicating science (3/12)

 ♦ Scientists (7/12) identify this project as changing their knowledge or understanding of KT. This is supported by analysis of questions on KT (e.g., whose job is it to do KT? What is the role of basic/clinical scientists in KT?). Compared to baseline interviews, scientists now place far greater emphasis on the role of scientists in KT (8/12), KT as a shared responsibility (7/12), the importance of two-way dialogue (6/12)

 ♦ Scientists (4/12) identify specific strategies for scientists and knowledge-users to work together which reflect the literature on IKT best practices: e.g., involve knowledge-users from the very beginning (4/12), regular communication and engagement (4/12), include those experienced in IKT (2/12)

 ♦ Scientists reference a change in science practice broadly (4/12) and similar research being conducted using IKT (3/12) as markers of success from the project

 ♦ Scientists note their “biggest surprise” during the IKT process was learning the scientific validity of KT science (2/12)

 ♦ Steering committee members are all able to describe the GET-FACTS IKT activities (8/8)

 ♦ Steering committee members are all able to describe differences between end-of-grant and IKT approaches to KT, and are able to describe both advantages and challenges of doing IKT work (8/8)

 ♦ Steering committee members describe greater understanding of science (specifically science related to food allergy) compared to before the project (5/8), though some describe no change (2/8)

 ♦ Steering committee members articulate limitations of scientific research findings (broadly) with regards to their own work and discuss broad implications for how to build research into their organizations and communications strategies (5/8)

 ♦ Steering committee members describe similar research being done with IKT as marker of success from the project (4/8)

 ♦ Steering committee members note their “biggest surprise” during the IKT process was the willingness of scientists to participate (3/8)