« Back to Assessment Instruments
Qualitative/Quantitative:
Type of Instrument:
Number of Items:
34Subscale Information:
Not FoundLanguage Availability:
Brief Description:
The Landry's Knowledge Utilization Scale is a tool developed to measure the extent to which policymakers incorporate research evidence into their decision-making processes. It assesses various dimensions of knowledge utilization, such as transmission, cognition, reference, effort, influence and application generating. Policymakers' responses to the scale help researchers understand the factors influencing the utilization of knowledge in policy development and implementation. By identifying barriers and facilitators, the scale contributes to enhancing the effectiveness of knowledge translation efforts and promoting evidence-informed policymaking.Citing Literature - Development/Original:
Landry, R., Amara, N., & Lamari, M. (2001). Climbing the ladder of research utilization: Evidence from social science research. Science Communication, 22(4), 396-422.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547001022004003.Citing Literature - Empirical Use/Application:
Amara, Nabil, Mathieu Ouimet, and Réjean Landry. New evidence on instrumental, conceptual, and symbolic utilization of university research in government agencies. Science communication 26.1 (2004): 75-106. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547004267491.
Landry, Rejean, Nabil Amara, and Mathieu Ouimet. Determinants of knowledge transfer: evidence from Canadian university researchers in natural sciences and engineering. The Journal of Technology Transfer 32 (2007): 561-592. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-006-0017-5.
Landry, Rejean, Moktar Lamari, and Nabil Amara. The extent and determinants of the utilization of university research in government agencies. Public administration review 63.2 (2003): 192-205. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6210.00279.Website:
Not FoundAttachments:
Version:
Not FoundRelated Instruments:
Not Found
Landry’s Knowledge Utilization Scale among Policymakers
Qualitative/Quantitative:
The assessment instrument uses quantitative and/or qualitative data
- Quantitative
Type of Instrument:
The type of the assessment instrument
- Periodic Reflection
Number of Items:
Number of items in the assessment instrument
34Subscale Information:
Names of each of the subscales and the number of items for each of the subscales
Not FoundLanguage Availability:
Language(s) in which the assessment instrument is available
- English
Brief Description:
Brief summary description of assessment instrument
The Landry's Knowledge Utilization Scale is a tool developed to measure the extent to which policymakers incorporate research evidence into their decision-making processes. It assesses various dimensions of knowledge utilization, such as transmission, cognition, reference, effort, influence and application generating. Policymakers' responses to the scale help researchers understand the factors influencing the utilization of knowledge in policy development and implementation. By identifying barriers and facilitators, the scale contributes to enhancing the effectiveness of knowledge translation efforts and promoting evidence-informed policymaking.Citing Literature - Development/Original:
Reference for publication describing the development of the assessment instrument
Landry, R., Amara, N., & Lamari, M. (2001). Climbing the ladder of research utilization: Evidence from social science research. Science Communication, 22(4), 396-422.https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547001022004003.
Citing Literature - Empirical Use/Application:
Reference for publications on the application of the assessment instrument
Amara, Nabil, Mathieu Ouimet, and Réjean Landry. New evidence on instrumental, conceptual, and symbolic utilization of university research in government agencies. Science communication 26.1 (2004): 75-106. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547004267491.Landry, Rejean, Nabil Amara, and Mathieu Ouimet. Determinants of knowledge transfer: evidence from Canadian university researchers in natural sciences and engineering. The Journal of Technology Transfer 32 (2007): 561-592. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-006-0017-5.
Landry, Rejean, Moktar Lamari, and Nabil Amara. The extent and determinants of the utilization of university research in government agencies. Public administration review 63.2 (2003): 192-205. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6210.00279.
Website:
Website providing access to and/or describing the assessment instrument
Not FoundAttachments:
Related files uploaded (instrument if directly available) including descriptions for each
Version:
Number/name of the most recent version of the assessment instrument
Not FoundRelated Instruments:
Indicate if assessment instrument is related to another instrument in the repository.
Not FoundImplementation Science Considerations
- ACE Star Model of Knowledge Transformation
- Active Implementation Framework
- Adherence Optimization Framework
- Availability, Responsiveness & Continuity (ARC): An Organizational & Community Intervention Model
- Blueprint for Dissemination
- CDC DHAP's Research-to-Practice Framework
- Caledonian Practice Development Model
- Choosing Wisely Deimplementation Framework
- Collaborative Model for Knowledge Translation Between Research and Practice Settings
- Conceptual Framework for Research Knowledge Transfer and Utilization
- Conceptual Model of Knowledge Utilization
- Conceptualizing Dissemination Research and Activity: Canadian Heart Health Initiative
- Conduct and Utilization of Research in Nursing (CURN)
- Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR)
- Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) 2.0
- Coordinated Implementation Model
- Critical Realism & the Arts Research Utilization Model (CRARIUM)
- Davis' Pathman-PRECEED Model
- Designing and evaluating interventions to eliminate racial and ethnic disparities in health care
- Dissemination and Implementation Framework for an Early Childhood Obesity Prevention Program
- Dissemination of Evidence-based Interventions to Prevent Obesity
- Effective Dissemination Strategies
- Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) model (Conceptual Model of Evidence-based Practice Implementation in Public Service Sectors)
- Facilitating Adoption of Best Practices (FAB) Model
- Framework for Knowledge Translation
- Framework for Spread
- Framework for Translating Evidence into Action
- Framework for the Dissemination & Utilization of Research for Health-Care Policy & Practice
- General theory of implementation
- Generic Implementation Framework
- Implementation Effectiveness Model
- Interacting Elements of Integrating Science, Policy, and Practice
- Intervention Mapping
- Iowa Model of Evidence-Based Practice
- Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice Model and Guidelines
- Knowledge Exchange Framework
- Knowledge Transfer and Exchange
- Model for Improving the Dissemination of Nursing Research
- Model for Predictors of Adoption
- Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM)
- Precede-Proceed Model
- Process Model of Implementation from a Policy Perspective Depicting the Process at One Policy Level
- Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS)
- Pronovost's 4E's Process Theory
- RAND Model of Persuasive Communication and Diffusion of Medical Innovation
- Research Development Dissemination and Utilization Framework
- Six-Step Framework for International Physical Activity Dissemination
- Stetler Model of Research Utilization
- Technology Transfer Model
- The SPIRIT Action Framework
- Theoretical Domains Framework
- Utilization-Focused Surveillance Framework
- Weiner organizational readiness
- Adoption
- Feasibility
- Fidelity
- Adapt and tailor to context
- Change infrastructure
- Develop stakeholder interrelationships
- Engage consumers
- Provide interactive assistance
- Support clinicians
- Train and educate stakeholders
- Use evaluative and iterative strategies
- Utilize financial strategies
Constructs Assessed:
Constructs assessed by the assessment instrument (linked to constructs included in the D&I models webtool)Theories, Models, Frameworks Assessed:
The D&I TMFs relevant for the assesment instrument based on constructs assessedImplementation Outcomes:
The relevance of the assessment instrument to various implementation outcomesImplementation Strategies:
The implementation strategy/ies evaluated by the assessment instrumentPhase of Implementation Process:
Not FoundPhase of implementation process when the assessment instrument can be used
Intended Focus
- Policy
- Researcher/Evaluator
- Clinical Outpatient
- Clinical Inpatient
- Residential Care
- Public Health Agency
- School
- Workplace
- Public (Laws, Regulations)
Levels of Data Collection:
The level(s) from which the assessment instrument collects dataIntended Priority Population:
Intended priority population from whom data are collected using the assessment instrumentIntended Priority Setting:
Intended priority setting in which the assessment instrument is usedPolicy:
Assessment instrument is relevant to policyEquity Focus:
Not Found
Psychometric Properties
Scoring:
NoThe assessment instrument produces a composite scoreNorms:
Not FoundMeasures of central tendency and distribution for the total score are based on small, medium, large sample sizeResponsiveness:
Not FoundThe ability of the assessment instrument to detect change over time (i.e., sensitivity to change or intervention effects).Validity:
Not FoundThe extent to which an instrument measures what it is intended to measure accurately.Reliability:
Not FoundThe extent to which results are consistent results over time, across raters, across settings, or across items intended to measure the same thing.Factor Analysis:
YesA statistical method that uses the correlation between observed variables to identify common factors.
Pragmatic Properties
Time to Administer:
Not FoundThe amount of time required to complete the assessment instrumentUses Secondary Data:
YesAssessment instrument relies on a secondary data sourceCost:
FreeCost associated with access to assessment instrument (Some instruments might require login.)Literacy:
Not FoundReadability of the items reported on.Interpretation:
YesExpertise needed for interpretation of data is reported.Training:
YesExpertise needed to use the assessment instrument is reportedResources Required to Administer:
None/LowResources needed to administer the assessment instrument (FTE for data collector, equipment, etc.)User Guidance:
Not FoundGuides are provided to support administration of assessment instrument/data collection, and/or analysis of data from the assessment instrument, and/or interpretation of data, and/or action/decision on how to use dataObtrusiveness:
Not FoundDegree of intrusion the participants will experience because of the data collection when using the assessment instrument (e.g., assessment instruments that rely on use of secondary data or automated data will be less obtrusive)Interactivity:
Not FoundData collection and/or result generation involves interactive components.
Comments
There are no reviews yet. Be the first one to write one.