English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  Implementation of clinical research results is challenging, yet the  responsibility  for implementation is seldom addressed. The process from research to the use of clinical research results in health care can be facilitated by  research funders . In this paper, we report the roles of ten Swedish research funders in relation to implementation and their views on responsibilities in implementation.    Findings  Ten cases were studied and compared using semi-structured interviews. In addition, websites and key documents were reviewed. Eight  facilitative  roles for research funders in relation to the implementation of clinical research results were identified. Three of them were common for several funders: “Advocacy work,” “Monitoring implementation outcomes,” and “Dissemination of knowledge.” Moreover, the research funders identified six different actors responsible for implementation, five of which belonged to the healthcare setting. Collective and organizational responsibilities were the most common forms of responsibilities among the identified actors responsible for implementation.    Conclusions  The roles commonly identified by the Swedish funders, “Advocacy work,” “Monitoring implementation outcomes,” and “Dissemination of knowledge,” seem feasible facilitative roles in relation to the implementation of clinical research results. However, many actors identified as responsible for implementation together with the fact that collective and organizational responsibilities were the most common forms of responsibilities entail a risk of implementation becoming no one’s responsibility.    Electronic supplementary material  The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-015-0290-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

implementation science

Research funders’ roles and perceived responsibilities in relation to the implementation of clinical research results: a multiple case study of Swedish research funders