Skip to main content

Table 3 Identified positive and negative roles for various stakeholders

From: Perspectives on the role of stakeholders in knowledge translation in health policy development in Uganda

  Positive roles (no. of respondents) Negative roles (no. of respondents) Challenges faced in playing their role in KT
CSOs Using research results (10) May de-campaign evidence if they are not convinced (2) Lack of capacity, weak internal organization, lack of independence
Advocating with policy makers to implement evidence (8)
If not given proper information, may cause confusion (1)
Mobilizing communities (7)
Disseminating research (2)
Undertaking research (2)
Liaising with the media (1)
Generating research topics (1)
Communities Can demand that evidence be implemented or demand that a policy be developed (6) Can be disruptive if results do consider community-contextual issues (1) Currently not able to engage in research policy processes
Contributing to development of the research agenda (6)
Can participate in research (1)
Media Disseminating research results (15) Misrepresenting evidence (5) Not well organized and are communicating to a public that is not strong enough to respond
Putting forward community views (4) De-campaigning implementation of evidence if they are not convinced (3)
Advocating for implementing evidence (1)
Policy makers Using evidence in developing policies and implementation (12) If evidence is not in their favor, can de-campaign it or misrepresent results (2) Inclined to serve political interests
May remain unconcerned about available evidence and play a passive role (1)
Establishing structures that can improve uptake of research (e.g. knowledge brokers), developing a communication strategy and a community research advisory network (5)
Providing stewardship (5)
Participating in research (1)
Parliamentarians/politicians Demanding implementation of evidence (8) Focus may differ; if they see that the available evidence does not favor their objectives and may lead to the loss of votes, they will not support the evidence. If they stand to benefit, they will support the evidence (4) Difference in objectives; technical objectives may differ from political objectives
Advocating for funding to implement recommendations (4)
Mobilizing and disseminating evidence to their communities (4)
Researchers Undertaking research (14) Corruption affects the research community to the extent that they may even provide misleading results (1) Balancing satisfying academic interest and community needs
Research users (1)
Donors Providing funding for research (16) May carry out research that does not focus on local needs (3) Availability of institutionalized platforms for setting research agendas and engaging in KT under strong MoH leadership
Providing funding for implementation (9)
At times they work toward fulfilling agency agendas (2)
Undertaking research activities (5)
May refuse to fund implementation of certain recommendations, for whatever reasons (1)
Encouraging the development of evidence-based polices (2)
WHO provides global evidence that guides policy development in countries (2)
Can make financial commitments to support implementation of evidence but fail to meet them (1)
Implementing research recommendations (1)
Influencing the research agenda (1)
Failure to contextualize global knowledge (1)
May bring in global knowledge (1)
Private health providers Using evidence to make investment decisions (1)   Weak internal organization