Search results

This paper aims to demonstrate the approach taken in delivering the quality and impact elements of Knowledge for Healthcare, the strategic development framework for National Health Service (NHS) library and knowledge services in England. It examines the work undertaken to enhance quality and demonstrate the value and impact of health library and knowledge services. It describes the interventions developed and implemented over a five-year period 2015–2020 and the move towards an outcome rather than process approach to impact and quality.

The case study illustrates a range of interventions that have been developed, including the outcomes of implementation to date. The methodology behind each intervention is informed by the evidence base and includes professional engagement.

The outcomes approach to the development and implementation of quality and impact interventions and assets provides evidence to demonstrate the value of library and knowledge staff to the NHS in England to both high-level decision-makers and service users.

The interventions are original concepts developed within the NHS to demonstrate system-wide impacts and change. The Evaluation Framework has been developed based on the impact planning and assessment (IPA) methodology. The interventions can be applied to other healthcare systems, and the generic learning is transferable to other library and knowledge sectors, such as higher education.

This paper reports on research exploring the intersections between researchers and communication professionals' perspectives on the objectives, funders and organizational influences on their science communication practices.

Examining one context, the inter-organizational BCDC Energy Research project based at five different research organizations in Finland, this paper presents data from semi-structured interviews with 17 researchers and 15 communication professionals.

The results suggest that performance-based funding policies that drive the proliferation of large-scale research projects can create challenges. In particular, a challenge arises in generating a shared sense of identity and purpose amongst researchers and communication professionals. This may have unintended negative impacts on the quality and cohesiveness of the science communication which occurs.

The study was exploratory in nature and focuses on one organizational and institutional environment. Further research with a wider number of projects, as well as funders, would be conducive to a greater understanding of the issues involved.

On a practical level, this research suggests that the creation of clearer communications awareness and guidance may be helpful in some large-scale projects, particularly involving broad numbers of organizations, individual researchers and funders.

This is one of the first studies examining the perspectives of both researchers and communication professionals working over one project, drawing together a range of different institutional and disciplinary perspectives. The results highlight the importance of the influences of funding on science communication aims, assumptions, cultures and structures. The article articulates the need for further research in this area.