Search results

The fire sector within the United Kingdom has identified a need to further develop their systematic use of academic literature and develop mechanisms to include academic knowledge to inform evidence-based policy and practice. By increasing knowledge exchange between the fire sector and academia, the ability to horizon scan and identify future relevant phenomena of interest to the fire sector will be achieved. Consequently, the evidence base and horizon scanning will increase the specificity of techniques, approaches and practices needed to continually improve the safety of the activities completed within the firefighting occupation, and it will also provide priority areas for investment and increase firefighter safety.

This technical paper primarily features an initial scoping review of academic and grey literature and an operational incident data review. This was completed to provide an initial and updated review of disciplines and areas of academia that are actively engaged in research relevant to the fire and rescue service. Consequently, this method sought to identify and examine the various disciplines of academia involved in fire research. This paper then uses that outcome to suggest a model of multidisciplinarity to inform the fire sector.

As a result of the scoping review, each academic discipline was identified and an initial review developed a predetermined set of key search terms. This was established through identifying the most frequently used fire-related terms within each discipline. This allowed for a comprehensive understanding of the breadth of activity and depth of complexity of fire related research within each discipline and an indicative set of key search terms to be developed. Recommendations are formulated to suggest next steps to routinely incorporate the academic knowledge base in the learning process of the fire and rescue services in the United Kingdom.

This paper provides an initial scoping map of academic literature and disciplines relevant to activities completed in the UK fire sector, which can be used to further develop the evidence base to inform the fire and rescue service of the United Kingdom. It also outlines possible mechanisms and a model to systematically facilitate knowledge exchange between academia and the fire sector by which knowledge exchange could further support the development of evidence-based policy and practice. The broad range of benefits of collaboration between the fire and rescue service and academia are explored.

This paper provides clear evidence as to why fire related research should have an increased priority status to inform the national fire and rescue services learning process and evidence for national policy and guidance development within the UK fire and rescue service. Additionally, recommendations are made to support the consideration of academic evidence in the systematic sector wide learning process.

Previously, the UK fire and rescue service had limited coordinated strategic engagement with academic disciplines to further develop their learning processes in order to produce an evidence base, which is cognisant of academic research to inform practice and guidance. This paper begins the narrowing of that gap by categorising academic literature relevant to fire research into clear disciplines, mapping these to an updated breadth of current activities undertaken by the fire and rescue service across the United Kingdom. The process also details a pilot of the proposed model to support knowledge exchange by producing an academically evidence-based submission to the National Fire Chiefs Council organisational learning process.

Notwithstanding that evidence-based human resource management (EBHRM) is gaining more ground in governmental institutions, it is still lacking a clear and research-driven conceptualisation (Marler and Fisher, 2013). Therefore, this study seeks to establish a fundamental clarifying concept of EBHRM by using a systematic literature review.

This method builds on an intensive scanning of 2,584 (interdisciplinary) articles, collected from Web of Science and Scopus. Eventually, 50 articles met the predetermined inclusion criteria and were analysed. The most recent conceptualisation of evidence-based management in the literature has served as a guideline to compare the review results and further scrutinise the differences and similarities (Barends et al., 2014; Barends and Rousseau, 2018; Rynes and Bartunek, 2017).

This has enabled us to elaborate a comprehensive conceptualisation. The articles were divided into two groups, one group (n = 31) has Rousseau et al. as a reference, the other (n = 19) did not, and used various definitions. Three themes were identified: evidence-based research methods (n = 30), specific skills (n = 36) necessary to apply an evidence-based strategy and a link with the academic-practice gap (n = 25).

Based on the results, we recommend adding two dimensions to strengthen the current conceptualisation: a first dimension referring to how evidence-based management can be established (i.e. which methods and skills are necessary) and a second dimension referring to the why of evidence-based management in an organisation (reducing the academic-practice gap).

This paper starts from a systematic review approach unlike previous research in the field to contribute to the further conceptualisation of EBHRM (Rynes and Bartunek, 2017).

The ambition of human rights-based research is to generate an evidence base aligned to specific rights and rights holders. This chapter addresses the question ‘How does the ethical communication of research evidence support the achievement of this ambition?’ It outlines a Communication of Evidence For Impact (CEFI) approach that is focused on the realisation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). CEFI proposes that human rights-based communication is: a public good; a legal imperative in States that have ratified CRPD, and a moral imperative in States yet to sign or ratify; a core research competency and ethical requirement; participatory; and grounded in a culture of inclusion, intersectionality, and allyship. This chapter explores how five actors – States, research ethics committees, researchers, funders, and publishers – can each contribute to ethical communication. Recommendations are made for including and futureproofing CEFI in a disability research ethics framework.

The point of departure for this viewpoint paper is the current development in which landscape architects are working towards achieving the United Nations sustainable development goals and the associated cross-cutting pledge “Leave No One Behind”. The sustainable development goals 3 and 11 can be achieved through landscape projects that are inclusive and health promoting, and the authors argue that an evidence-based design process is needed to ensure that project designs deliver what they promise. However, most landscape architects are not trained in evidence-based design and are therefore unsure of what can be used as evidence. A further challenge is the lack of relevant and applicable research evidence for design processes.

The authors present a process model for evidence-based health design in landscape architecture as an overall framework on which the authors base their arguments. The model includes four topics of evidence: target group, human health, environment and use of nature. For each topic, the authors present their view on what may be considered as evidence and where it can be found or generated. The study view is supported by a detailed presentation of where and how evidence was found and generated in a design project for an accessible and health-promoting forest trail for people with mobility disabilities.

The authors suggest a broad definition of evidence, and that the design process should draw on evidence from relevant research and practice disciplines. Evidence can be found in multiple sources, for example, scientific articles, theoretical works and design guidelines. It can also be generated by landscape architects themselves, for example, through landscape analyses and stakeholder workshops. The evidence should guide and support the landscape architect and not dictate the design process.

The authors hope that the knowledge provided on the evidence-based health design process and on where to collect or how to generate evidence may inspire landscape architects in their future health design projects.

People with mobility disabilities face many health challenges and should potentially be able to benefit from visiting green spaces. The authors hope that the knowledge provided on the evidence-based health design process and on where to collect or how to generate evidence may inspire landscape architects in their future health design projects.

There is growing interest around the world in more effectively linking public payments to the provision of public goods from agriculture. However, published evidence syntheses suggest mixed, weak or uncertain evidence for many agri-environment scheme options. To inform any future “public money for public goods” based policy, further synthesis work is needed to assess the evidence-base for the full range of interventions currently funded under agri-environment schemes. Further empirical research and trials should then focus on interventions for which there is mixed or limited evidence. Furthermore, to ensure the data collected is comparable and can be synthesised effectively, it is necessary to reach agreement on essential variables and methods that can be prioritised by those conducting research and monitoring. Future policy could then prioritise public money for the public goods that can most reliably be delivered, offering better value for taxpayers and improving the provision of ecosystem services from agricultural landscapes.

The current paper sought to assess health research institutions in transferring knowledge from health research findings into decision and policy making in Malawi. The study employed both a qualitative and a multi-case study approach. Data was gathered through interviews. The study's participants were purposefully chosen directors of research institutions, public universities, and the ministry of health. Few research institutions compile a list of organisations that might benefit from their health research findings, and even fewer libraries have databanks or repositories. Policymakers rarely receive actionable messages from research institutions. Researchers are short on communication skills as well as time to transfer research findings into usable formats. Research centres including libraries should provide an opportunity for interacting and enhancing the use of research evidence. Individuals, research groups, institutions must all develop stakeholder interaction structures. Structures should define incentives and advancement opportunities for those working in health research institutions.

This paper synthesises international research on effective mentor training, education and development (MTED).

An adaptive theory methodology (Layder, 1998), combining deductive and inductive methods, was deployed in a qualitative meta-synthesis of thematic findings generated in three studies: a systematic review of literature published between January 2010 and July 2020, together with a secondary analysis of studies including evidence on MTED; a subsequent systematic review of literature published between August 2020 and May 2023 and a general inductive analysis (Thomas, 2006) of interviews of leaders of large-scale MTED programmes that had good evidence of impact.

Our meta-synthesis found that effective MTED is evidence-based, refined through ongoing research, tailored both to individual needs and context and includes sustained support. Effective pedagogical approaches in MTED are underpinned by adult learning principles and establish a learning climate that fosters open and trusting relationships. Effective MTED is shaped by the espoused mentoring model or approach, with particular emphasis on understanding, building and sustaining mentoring relationships and incorporating observing, practising, critically reflecting on and receiving feedback on mentoring.

The study will be helpful to practitioners designing, reviewing and evaluating MTED programmes, researchers seeking to enhance the sparse MTED evidence base and programme commissioners.

The original and significant contribution of this study is the identification of key principles relating to the overall design of – as well as specific content, pedagogical approaches and supporting resources within – MTED programmes that have evidenced positive effects on mentors, mentees, mentoring and/or organisations.

The purpose of this study is to revisit the conventional wisdom about a key contribution [i.e. strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats (SWOT) analysis] in the field of strategic management. The societal context and the role of academics, consultants and executives is taken into account in the emergence of SWOT analysis during the 1960–1980 period as a pivotal development within the broader context of the satisfactory, opportunities, faults, threats (SOFT) approach. The authors report on both the content and the approach, so that other scholars seeking to invigorate indigenous theories and/or underreported strategy practices will thrive.

Applying a historiographic approach, the authors introduce an evidence-based methodology for interpreting historical sources. This methodology incorporates source criticism, triangulation and hermeneutical interpretation, drawing upon insights from robust evidence through three iterative stages.

The underreporting of the SOFT approach/SWOT analysis can be attributed to several factors, including strategy tools being integrated into planning frameworks rather than being published as standalone materials; restricted circulation of crucial long-range planning service/theory and practice of planning reports due to copyright limitations; restricted access to the Stanford Research Institute Planning Library in California; and the enduring popularity of SOFT and SWOT variations, driven in part by their memorable acronyms.

In the spirit of a renaissance in strategic planning research, the authors unveil novel theoretical and social connections in the emergence of SWOT analysis by combining evidence from both theory and practice and delving into previously unexplored areas.

Caution is advised for scholars who examine the discrete time frame of 1960–1980 through mere bibliometric techniques. This study underscores the risks associated with gathering incomplete and/or inaccurate data, emphasizing the importance of triangulating evidence beyond scholarly databases. The paradigm shift of strategic management research due to the advent of large language models poses new challenges and the risk of conserving and perpetuating academic urban legends, myths and lies if training data is not adequately curated.

Evidence-based practice is a professional standard for occupational therapists, but limited time, resources and knowledge challenge its implementation. This study aims to identify what free evidence summary sources (FESS) can be found through a simple online search, related to child/youth interventions surrounding cerebral palsy (CP), autism spectrum disorder (ASD), developmental coordination disorder (DCD), mental health or attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (MH/ADHD). Evidence summaries share research in concise, time-efficient manners.

An internet-based scoping review was conducted between February 2022 and July 2022, using Google, and known evidence summary producers. Evidence summaries meeting the inclusion criteria were located and catalogued. Type of agency, target audiences, purpose and distribution of evidence summaries related to diagnosis were identified for each FESS.

Ten FESS were found, which produced 113 intervention-focused evidence summaries within the past 10 years. These FESS were aimed at a variety of target audiences: service providers, service users, parents/families, researchers and commissioners, and were produced primarily by non-profit/charity organisations (6 of 10) who were trying to fill a gap in evidence. Forty-eight evidence summaries were related to ASD, 34 to CP, 29 to MH/ADHD and two to DCD.

A catalogue of FESS that exist online was produced, to support evidence-based practice for paediatric occupational therapists with limited resources, and may support improved health promotion and informed decision-making for service users. No consistent framework for FESS evidence summaries exists at this time.