JCPSLP Vol 23 Issue 2 2021

to completion. In a higher education environment, these metrics lead to career progression and can be easily measured and tracked. Harder to track and measure are their knowledge translation activities and impact. Given the infancy of implementation science as an academic discipline and the associated paucity of implementation frameworks, strategies and outcome measurements, defining success in knowledge translation in reference to career progression has been challenging (Curran, 2020). Further, some researchers just simply do not have the skills to be able to complete knowledge translations activities well. While this is not maleficent in intent, it could be a blind spot for researchers that they need to be mindful of and actively overcome. For clinicians, access to adequate resources to support and implement evidence-based practice is a key driver to consume new knowledge. One of the largest barriers is a lack of access to costly journals or even the actual articles whereby they can access the latest evidence- based literature to help guide them in their clinical practice. Furthermore, conferences, where cutting edge research is often disseminated, are becoming more and more expensive to attend. Moreover, in my experience at least, the way the information is presented at conferences can be too scientific and “researchy” and less “this is what it actually means to clinical practice and how you can implement it”. Thankfully, there has been a shift over the past few years as the importance of knowledge translation has become more valued. For example, almost all funding bodies now require the inclusion of a knowledge translation plan as part of the initial application and there has been a surge in open access journals, offering free access to peer-reviewed journal articles. In the past, initiatives such as “presenting at conferences” or “publishing in reputable journals” would suffice; however, there are changing expectations in how researchers conduct their knowledge translation activities and importantly, how they measure the impact of their research. This process helps to ensure that researchers are thinking about their knowledge translation activities during the development phases of their research projects and not just tacking it on at the end as an afterthought. Coupled with a swelling knowledge base in implementation science, more and more, researchers are able to understand how to effectively translate their research work into meaningful, clinically relevant strategies to improve uptake in the clinical community. So considering our ethical responsibilities: What does this mean for clinical researchers? What should researchers be thinking about? For researchers, knowledge translation strategies should be at the forefront of our thought processes when developing projects. Knowledge translation plans should be created and included in all research grants or project designs. Plans need to have clear outcomes and metrics so that their success can be evaluated. Researchers need to take it upon themselves to build their knowledge translation skills and mindsets. While research publications, grants and higher degree by research students are still vital in their research careers, the burgeoning suite of technological and social media platforms in recent years provide researchers with almost unlimited reach to clinicians. Platforms such as Twitter and LinkedIn offer cheap and vast distribution networks allowing researchers to reach their end-users almost

instantaneously. Importantly, researchers need to be savvy in how they package their research and be mindful of how their end-users consume information and the communication channels they use. Posting a link to their most recent publication hiding behind a paywall does not constitute knowledge translation. Infographics, short summaries in lay terms, interviews with media, videos, and podcasts are just a few strategies that researchers can utilise to disseminate their research. As mentioned, knowledge translation strategies should be well thought out and planned as part of the entire research project, and not completed right at the end of the research process as an afterthought. And what can the profession do to help speed up the translation of the evidence into practice? In our connected world, I think clinicians have an ethical responsibility to keep abreast of the recent advances in their field, as addressed in the SPA Code of Ethics, section 3.2. While researchers are ethically obligated to employ strategies to expand their reach to disseminate their findings, clinicians are equally obligated to seek out this information to critically evaluate and change their own practice based on the most recent research. Perhaps the “simplest”—and I say this with the greatest respect that it is much easier said than done—way to speed up the translation of evidence into practice is for clinicians to engage in life-long learning and have the courage to challenge their own practices. Being open to new approaches and seeking opportunities to expand on their knowledge is critical in ensuring their clients receive the best interventions supported with strong scientific evidence. Definitely agree, and in the second domain of the SPA 2020 Professional Standards (2020b) titled “reflective practice and life-long learning”, speech pathologists are encouraged to plan and advocate for our professional development needs, as well as participate in professional development thoughout our carers. In my experience of speech pathology as a profession, this inquisitiveness and desire to achieve the best outcomes for their clients is innate. However, there are always ways we can improve. One common thing I often hear when working with clinicians is the notion that they are “not researchers” or “are not smart enough to be a researcher”. This is simply not true. Everyone can be a researcher and we need to expand our mental schema around what research is. Schemas of research should not just be about creating the new knowledge but expanded to include the implementation of that knowledge into practice. My response to a claim of not “being a researcher” is always some iteration of the notion that even if you are not a research creator, you can still be a research contributor, or in the very least, a research consumer. The mindset change I’m always spruiking is that all clinicians possess the skills to be involved in research in some way or another. Indeed, we are ethically responsible to do so. Interestingly, this is the very topic of the “evidence-based clinical decision-making” unit that I [Suze] am teaching this semester! The goal is to provide students with a “tool-box” to take into clinic to support their practice as they read and critique articles and plan goals and outcome measures.

102

JCPSLP Volume 23, Number 2 2021

Journal of Clinical Practice in Speech-Language Pathology