Thoughts on Lags Between Research, Dissemination, and Implementation

During my MPH studies (~16 years ago), I heard about the lag between research and implementation. It astounded me at the time to learn how people we not getting the best, evidence-based care as fast as they maybe could. It’s surprising that lag is that is still the case. Something that surprised me was that the best-case scenario it might take 17 years to turn 14% of original research to be implemented in standard patient care (Brownson et al., 2018). However, that doesn’t account for the studies that get forgotten or discarded. There is a real issue of patients not receiving the best evidence-based care in all circumstances. Decreasing funding has led to trade-offs between projects that will provide predictable results versus more innovative research that may result in greater public health impact (Bauer et al., 2015). Efficacy (internal validity, causality) versus effectiveness (external validity, generalizability) and the goals of population health are in constant tension (Bauer et al., 2015). What should we focus on? Within research, spending on health services research, models of care, and service innovations, represented only approximately 1.5% of biomedical research funding (Brownson et al., 2018). Passive methods of dissemination include publication of consensus statements in professional journals, mass mailings and these methods have been ineffective (Brownson et al., 2018). Brownson et al suggest the key is to tap into the intrinsic motivation of people running the programs and also those enrolled in the…