See the published version of this preprint at BMC Health Services Research.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
Research article
Marko Simunovic
McMaster University Faculty of Health Sciences
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2245-3468
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Background: Across Ontario, since the year 2006 various knowledge translation (KT) interventions designed to improve the quality of rectal cancer surgery have been implemented by the provincial cancer agency or by individual researchers. Ontario is divided administratively into 14 health regions. We piloted a method to audit and score for each region of the province the KT interventions implemented to improve the quality of rectal cancer surgery.
Methods: We interviewed stakeholders to audit KT interventions used in respective regions over years 2006 to 2014. Results were summarized into narrative and visual forms. Using a modified Delphi approach, KT experts reviewed these data and then, for each region, scored implementation of KT interventions using a 20-item KT Signature Assessment Tool. Scores could range from 20-100 with higher scores commensurate with greater KT intervention implementation.
Results: There were thirty interviews. KT experts produced scores for each region that were bimodally distributed, with an average score for 2 regions of 78 (range 73-83) and for 12 regions of 30.5 (range 22-38).
Conclusion: Our methods efficiently identified two groups with similar KT Signature scores. Two regions had relatively high scores reflecting numerous KT interventions and the use of sustained iterative approaches in addition to those encouraged by the provincial cancer agency, while 12 regions had relatively low scores reflecting minimal activities outside of those encouraged by the provincial cancer agency. These groupings will be used for future comparative quantitative analyses to help determine if higher KT signature scores correlate with improved measures for quality of rectal cancer surgery.
Keywords
rectal cancer surgery, KT interventions, region-level KT signature scores
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Loading...
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
View the published article at BMC Health Services Research.
Version 4
Posted 01 Jun, 2020
No community comments so far
Editorial decision: Accept
On 24 May, 2020
Editor assigned
On 20 May, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 19 May, 2020
Editor invited
On 19 May, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Minor revision
On 15 May, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 04 May, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 30 Apr, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 30 Apr, 2020
Editor assigned
On 23 Apr, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 22 Apr, 2020
Editor invited
On 22 Apr, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Revise before sending to peer reviewers
On 23 Apr, 2020
Editor assigned
On 26 Mar, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 26 Mar, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 25 Mar, 2020
Editor invited
On 25 Mar, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 13 Mar, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 28 Feb, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 10 Feb, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 03 Feb, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 31 Jan, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 31 Jan, 2020
Editor assigned
On 17 Jan, 2020
First submitted
On 16 Jan, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 16 Jan, 2020
Editor invited
On 16 Jan, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Learn more about our company.
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
See the published version of this preprint at BMC Health Services Research.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Research article
Marko Simunovic
McMaster University Faculty of Health Sciences
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2245-3468
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
View the published article at BMC Health Services Research.
Version 4
Posted 01 Jun, 2020
No community comments so far
Editorial decision: Accept
On 24 May, 2020
Editor assigned
On 20 May, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 19 May, 2020
Editor invited
On 19 May, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Minor revision
On 15 May, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 04 May, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 30 Apr, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 30 Apr, 2020
Editor assigned
On 23 Apr, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 22 Apr, 2020
Editor invited
On 22 Apr, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Revise before sending to peer reviewers
On 23 Apr, 2020
Editor assigned
On 26 Mar, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 26 Mar, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 25 Mar, 2020
Editor invited
On 25 Mar, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 13 Mar, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 28 Feb, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 10 Feb, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 03 Feb, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 31 Jan, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 31 Jan, 2020
Editor assigned
On 17 Jan, 2020
First submitted
On 16 Jan, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 16 Jan, 2020
Editor invited
On 16 Jan, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
View the published article at BMC Health Services Research.
Background: Across Ontario, since the year 2006 various knowledge translation (KT) interventions designed to improve the quality of rectal cancer surgery have been implemented by the provincial cancer agency or by individual researchers. Ontario is divided administratively into 14 health regions. We piloted a method to audit and score for each region of the province the KT interventions implemented to improve the quality of rectal cancer surgery.
Methods: We interviewed stakeholders to audit KT interventions used in respective regions over years 2006 to 2014. Results were summarized into narrative and visual forms. Using a modified Delphi approach, KT experts reviewed these data and then, for each region, scored implementation of KT interventions using a 20-item KT Signature Assessment Tool. Scores could range from 20-100 with higher scores commensurate with greater KT intervention implementation.
Results: There were thirty interviews. KT experts produced scores for each region that were bimodally distributed, with an average score for 2 regions of 78 (range 73-83) and for 12 regions of 30.5 (range 22-38).
Conclusion: Our methods efficiently identified two groups with similar KT Signature scores. Two regions had relatively high scores reflecting numerous KT interventions and the use of sustained iterative approaches in addition to those encouraged by the provincial cancer agency, while 12 regions had relatively low scores reflecting minimal activities outside of those encouraged by the provincial cancer agency. These groupings will be used for future comparative quantitative analyses to help determine if higher KT signature scores correlate with improved measures for quality of rectal cancer surgery.
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Loading...