Document Type : Commentary

Authors

1 School of Social Sciences, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW, Australia

2 Department of Social Work, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

3 Centre for Patient Quality and Safety, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia

4 Department of General Practice and Primary Care, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

Abstract

The editorial by Rycroft-Malone and colleagues highlights the fact that despite considerable efforts, knowledge translation and implementation sciences fail to have the desired impact on practice, policy and service delivery. As integrated knowledge translation and co-production/co-design academics, we resonated with several themes relevant to our own work. First, that co-production amplified opportunity for evidence to be translated into practice. Second, while not a new concept, the notion of partnership approaches needs to pay greater attention to sharing power in a way that ensures decolonsing approaches are embedded with humility and trust. Third, the micro, meso, and macro levels are contributing to the knowledge translation landscape. Our commentary enhances the discussion of decolonising research, of thinking about the impacts of research and indeed, “reimagining” what future impacts may look like. Further, we suggest the neo-liberally positioned academia needs to include other knowledge/livedexperience service users and recognise true, equitable and nurtured collaboration. 

Keywords