Why Don’t We See More Translation of Health Promotion Research to Practice? Rethinking the Efficacy-to-Effectiveness Transition
Author(s) -
Russell E. Glasgow,
Edward Lichtenstein,
Alfred C. Marcus
Publication year - 2003
Publication title -
american journal of public health
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.284
H-Index - 264
eISSN - 1541-0048
pISSN - 0090-0036
DOI - 10.2105/ajph.93.8.1261
Subject(s) - knowledge translation , intervention (counseling) , self efficacy , health promotion , psychology , promotion (chess) , medicine , applied psychology , medical education , public health , public relations , nursing , social psychology , knowledge management , computer science , political science , politics , law
The gap between research and practice is well documented. We address one of the underlying reasons for this gap: the assumption that effectiveness research naturally and logically follows from successful efficacy research. These 2 research traditions have evolved different methods and values; consequently, there are inherent differences between the characteristics of a successful efficacy intervention versus those of an effectiveness one. Moderating factors that limit robustness across settings, populations, and intervention staff need to be addressed in efficacy studies, as well as in effectiveness trials. Greater attention needs to be paid to documenting intervention reach, adoption, implementation, and maintenance. Recommendations are offered to help close the gap between efficacy and effectiveness research and to guide evaluation and possible adoption of new programs.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom