Important Dates

Notices

Table of Contents

• Description
• Objectives
• Eligibility
• Guidelines
• Performance Measurement
• Review Process and Evaluation
• How to Apply
• Contact Information
• Partner/Collaborator Description
• Additional Information

Description

Part of CIHR's mandate is to promote research that addresses the creation of new knowledge and its translation into improved health for Canadians, more effective health products and services and a strengthened health care system. The purpose of this Request for Applications is to further strengthen knowledge translation by funding research syntheses across CIHR's four themes: biomedical, clinical, health systems and services and the health of populations, societal and cultural dimensions of health and environmental influences on health, in order to support evidence-informed decision-making. It is expected that this targeted investment will lead to more research syntheses in selected, high priority, eligible thematic research areas related to health and health care.

Health technology assessment is not an eligible area under this RFA. Moreover, infrastructure and activities of Canadian Cochrane entities funded through other CIHR awards will not be supported through this RFA.

Background

This Request for Applications is announced under the Knowledge Translation Strategy Strategic Initiative: Support KT Research.

The CIHR Knowledge Translation Strategy: Innovation In Action outlines four strategic directions including support for syntheses of research evidence in areas deemed important in national consultations with research users. This activity requires research methods designed to systematically scope and synthesize evidence for particular target audiences, and translate the results of such syntheses using methods of knowledge exchange appropriate to the audience(s).

This type of synthesis work offers a number of advantages. First, reviews reduce bias in the estimation of the effectiveness of an intervention, prevention, treatment or policy option by identifying all relevant studies, selecting those that meet explicit criteria, appraising their quality and synthesizing the results using a transparent process. Second, reviews reduce the role that chance has to play in estimating effectiveness or cost-effectiveness, and allow more precise estimation of the impact of an intervention, treatment or policy option. Thus, users of research are less likely to be misled by results of a single investigation and can be more confident about what can be expected.¹

But increasingly, systematic review methodologies have been applied to questions other than those about the effectiveness of interventions designed for example to improve the health of populations and strengthen health systems. These questions may be about the appropriate application of effective interventions within the public health system or a health care organization, how to bring about change in an organization or about topics such as accessibility or continuity of care. Systematic reviews provide many advantages including the effective and efficient use of researchers' or decision makers' time, as the research literature has already been reviewed in a systematic and transparent manner. Another advantage of systematic reviews is that their results can be more constructively contested than the results of a single study. Furthermore, the transparency in each phase of the systematic review allows debate and discussion to focus on decision points within the review process (rather than on the relative merit of the results of one study over another) as well as on the applicability of the review to different contexts.² While syntheses are useful to inform decision-making, they are also useful to the research community to inform their own decisions regarding future research undertakings, and to research funding organizations to focus their investments. Accordingly, the purpose of this Request for Applications (RFA) is to support initiatives designed to systematically scope or synthesize research evidence, and in so doing to support efforts to translate this accumulated knowledge into communication formats useful for informed decision-making regarding health and health care issues.

Funding under this RFA is intended to support two types of review, targeted to issues deemed important over the next few years by research users:

Scoping reviews that entail a systematic selection, collection and summarization of existing evidence in a broad thematic area for the purpose of identifying areas: (a) in which sufficient evidence exists to conduct a systematic review, and (b) where insufficient evidence exists and where further primary research is necessary.

And/or

Systematic reviews that entail a systematic effort to identify, assess, and interpret the global pool of knowledge available to answer a focused question.

The science of synthesis is evolving. It is not surprising, therefore, that the terms used to describe the work envisioned, as well as the methods and results of such work vary among individuals and organizations. Yet, the principles underpinning scoping reviews include: systematically map the literature to clarify boundaries and definitions in the area, to identify areas in which systematic reviews are possible, and to identify gaps in evidence where primary research is necessary and would be timely. Scoping reviews help the research community and research funding organizations identify research priorities within priority thematic areas. But, they may also be very useful to the policy and practice community. For example, a scoping review may conclude that there is not sufficient evidence in an area to support a research-based recommendation, or that the evidence does not support a conclusive answer due to divergence in results. In situations such as these, the results of the scoping review can provide an important tool for convincing stakeholders that further assessments or alternative solutions are needed in order to answer their questions.³ For example, in the field of population and public health, the breadth of the evidentiary base is continuously evolving, requiring new and innovative methods for scoping and/or systematically reviewing and summarizing the body of evidence to ensure its relevance to decision making in population and public policy program and practice settings.

The principles underpinning systematic reviews are also conceptually straightforward: they are based on a specific and reproducible method that is used to identify, select and appraise all studies that meet quality standards and are judged to be relevant to a specific question. The results of the studies are then analyzed and summarized while taking assessments of their quality into consideration. Systematic reviews involve comprehensive reviews of evidence, and include reviews in areas where research exists across all types of evidence. For example, a systematic review could be conducted of the available qualitative research on a particular topic, or of a combination of quantitative and qualitative research.

Systematic reviews that include different types of research methods may be required to answer specific types of questions. Over the last two decades, scientists have established a reasonable consensus regarding "best practice" for systematic reviews that inform clinical decision-making, as well as public policy-making regarding adoption, use and discontinuation of health technologies. These methods rely heavily on the use of hierarchies of levels of evidence, with randomized controlled trials given the greatest weight and statistical methods (meta-analysis) may or may not be used to analyse and summarise the results of the included studies. Yet, not all research evidence is generated through randomized controlled trials. In such circumstances, systematic reviews must rely more heavily on quasi-experimental designs such as controlled before/after studies and interrupted time-series studies, etc. or on qualitative or observational data.

Research is accumulating regarding best methods of conducting research syntheses across different types of research (i.e. qualitative and quantitative) and levels of evidence. In order to better understand the methods of synthesis and mechanisms to improve the usefulness of this work, the Canadian Health Services Research Foundation (CHSRF) and England's Service Delivery and Organization Research and Development Programme (SDO) commissioned joint work in this area. The results of this research were published in a special supplement of the Journal of Health Services Research and Policy.

As recent studies examining the needs of population and public health decision-makers demonstrate⁴ there is a lack of awareness about existing relevant research and considerable variation across Canada respecting the capacity of research users to access available evidence. The developmental process of scoping reviews and systematic reviews must, therefore, where possible, taking into careful account the requirements of those who need to apply the evidence in different organizational contexts. While we expect that the science of synthesis will continue to evolve as a result of this and other work, it is clear that systematic reviews developed in consultation with stakeholders, structured to meet the needs of the intended user audience, and disseminated using methods of communication intended to strengthen a knowledge base among those target audiences, are useful to and used by relevant health decision-making communities.

This funding opportunity will help strengthen knowledge translation by funding research syntheses across all four themes of CIHR: biomedical, clinical, health systems and services and the health of populations, societal and cultural dimensions of health and environmental influences on health, in order to support evidence-informed decision-making. It is expected that this targeted investment will lead to more syntheses of knowledge in selected, high priority, eligible thematic research areas related to health and health care. It is on that basis that CIHR is interested in funding the work described in this RFA.

Funds Available

CIHR's contribution to the amount available for this initiative is subject to availability of funds voted annually to CIHR by parliamentary appropriations, and the conditions that may be attached to them.

• The total amount available for this initiative is $2.79M. This amount may increase if additional funding partners decide to participate. (Updated: 2007-03-07)
• The maximum amount awarded for a single grant is $100,000 per annum for up to 1 year. The equipment amount is awarded in year one.

Partner/Collaborator Participation

The Knowledge Translation Branch is dedicated to identifying and developing collaborations with other CIHR institute(s), branch(es) or office(s), funding organizations and stakeholders to enhance the availability of funding for this strategic initiative, and to create, where appropriate, opportunities for knowledge translation related to the scope of this particular initiative. Applicants are invited to visit the Descriptions of Partners section to find a list of partners and their respective mandates and/or strategic interests. This list will continue to evolve as new partners join in this initiative. The specific research foci and requirements for each partner are outlined in the section "Objectives".

Objectives

The specific objectives of this initiative are to:

• Encourage partnerships between researchers and users of research to address the evidence needs of the research users:
• Make scoping and systematic reviews available to the health research community, including CIHR, to inform them of specific areas of priority for primary research
• Increase the number of timely and relevant scoping reviews and systematic reviews in selected areas of high priority to support evidence-informed decision-making
• Increase the degree to which explicit communications and knowledge translation activities are undertaken to make scoping and systematic reviews readily available for use by citizens, clinicians, health system, healthcare managers, public policy-makers, public health practitioners, researchers, NGO's and research funding organizations in Canada to inform their decision-making processes.

Relevant Research Areas:

CIHR Knowledge Translation Branch
The role of the CIHR Knowledge Translation (KT) Branch is to create, support, monitor and sustain an environment that allows CIHR to deliver on its KT mandate. Fulfilling its corporate KT function, the KT Branch provides a focal point for KT as CIHR leads broad KT strategic initiatives and provides support to multi or pan-Institute KT initiatives.

There are 4 CIHR KT strategic directions. They are:

1. Support KT research, i.e. research on KT concepts and processes;
2. Contribute to building KT Networks, i.e. Networks of researchers and research users;
3. Strengthen and expand KT at CIHR, i.e. improve capability to support KT research and, with partners, KT itself; and,
4. Support and recognize KT excellence, i.e. build and celebrate a culture of KT.

Scoping and systematic reviews of KT research areas that would be of interest to the KT branch include:

• Terms and definitions of Knowledge Translation including a concept analysis of these terms/definitions
• Measurement of KT including inventories of tools or tool sets that would enable measurement and comparison across studies
• The role of context in influencing the use of knowledge
• Tools and instruments designed to identify barriers to the use of knowledge (research findings) that may be related to: 1) potential users of the knowledge, 2) the environment or context in which the knowledge may be used, and 3) attributes or characteristics of the knowledge
• Methods and measures to evaluate the health, social and economic impact of health research including instruments/indicators currently used by health research funding agencies to assess research impact
• The extent to which results of systematic reviews are sought after, understood, and used to inform the decision making process and/or put into practice by user groups

Specific research foci and requirements of individual partners:

CIHR - Clinical Research Initiative (CRI)
Clinical research is needed to determine which of the growing number of health discoveries actually work in humans and are safe. Clinical research is one of the three cornerstones of academic medicine, the other two being patient care and medical training. It seeks chiefly to develop new diagnostic, therapeutic and preventive strategies for ongoing improvement of health care quality. This makes it a vital link between basic research and clinical practice, and it is actually the core of evidence based medicine. Clinical research generates data for optimal decision making about which diagnostic, therapeutic and preventive strategies to recommend and teach.

Through the CRI, CIHR has given itself the mission of strengthening Clinical Research in Canada in order to accelerate the translation of clinical research discoveries into improved and cost-effective approaches to maintaining health and treating illness, and to provide evidence for sound health policies and an efficient health care system.

The CIHR Clinical Research Initiative will provide support (subject to availability of funds) for applications that are determined to be relevant to health research in human beings and\or of clinical relevance with a focus on one or more of the following:

• Mechanisms of human health and disease
• Translational research
• Experimental and observational Clinical Trials of prevention and therapy
• Health Care Services/Systems research
• Clinical Epidemiological studies

CIHR - Institute of Gender and Health (IGH) 
IGH supports research that addresses how sex (biological-genetic dimensions) and gender (social-cultural dimensions) interact with other socio-cultural, bio-physical, and political-economic factors to influence health and create conditions that differ with respect to risk factors or effective interventions for males and females throughout the lifespan. The objectives of the Institute for Gender and Health are to (1) generate evidence regarding the impact of sex and gender on health status, health behaviour, and health services use throughout the life span; (2) enhance understanding of how gender, sex and health interact with other health determinants; (3) provide evidence to inform the design of programs, policies and practices; (4) build the capacity of gender and health researchers in Canada; and (5) advance the gender and health perspective nationally and internationally.

Depending on available funds, IGH will support successful applications in all research theme areas that are relevant to its mandate and any of the following research priorities:

• Access and equity for vulnerable populations;
• Promoting health in the context of chronic conditions and disabilities;
• Gender and health across the lifespan;
• Promoting positive health behaviours and preventing addictions; and
• Gender and the environment.

The Institute of Gender and Health strongly encourages applicants to demonstrate the use of Gender/Sex-based or Gender/sex-sensitive analysis (GSBA) in applications. GSBA is an approach to research and evaluation which systematically inquires about biological (sex-based) and sociocultural (gender-based) differences between women and men, boys and girls, without presuming that any such differences exist. The purpose of GSBA is to promote rigorous sex/gender-sensitive health research which expands understanding of health determination in both sexes, in order to provide knowledge which can result in improvements in health and health care. IGH has produced a GSBA Resource Guide for applicants and reviewers that can be found on their website.

CIHR - Institute of Health Services and Policy Research (IHSPR)
IHSPR is dedicated to supporting innovative research, capacity-building and knowledge translation initiatives designed to improve the way health care services are organized, regulated, managed, financed, paid for, used and delivered, in the interest of improving the health and quality of life of all Canadians.

IHSPR will support successful applications in any of the following research priorities:

Equitable Access to Care
Access to care continues to be a priority for policy-makers and decisions makers. IHSPR has previously focused on documenting and identifying issues around timely access to care. The focus of this call is to synthesize existing evidence, both national and international, for strategies and interventions for change to allow for equitable access to quality care across the continuum of care, including for rural and remote communities as well as for vulnerable groups.

Timely Care
Timely care continues to be an important issue. Progress has been made in establishing benchmarks in particular areas. In this call, IHSPR seeks to expand both the pool of researchers and the research questions addressed by asking for synthesis of existing knowledge, both nationally and internationally in areas broader than those focused on to date. For example, we seek syntheses that focus on the economic effects of waiting, the role of media on public and patient perceptions and understanding of wait times, and the benefits, costs, and impact of wait time guarantees or other wait time interventions both within Canada and internationally.

Governance and Accountability
Governance and accountability is an increasing concern for the health sector. The focus of this call is to synthesize existing evidence, based on national and international experiences, on what constitutes effective governance and accountability structures; in particular lessons that can be drawn from proven good governance models, the processes adopted to support effective governance, the most appropriate measures of governance in health care, relationships between effective governance and management, differences between governance models in the public, not-for profit and for-profit sectors, best practices in governance models in regional health authorities, hospitals, and other agencies, the determination and incentives structures for performance measures, and the impact of different devolved decision-making structures (family practice teams, regional health authorities, community care agencies, etc.).

Electronic Health Records (EHR)
Many countries have made considerable investments in the implementation of EHR, and other health information technologies (e.g. web-based self-management) that capture electronic data at the point-of-health care (e.g lab, pharmacy, diagnostic imaging systems). These data, either alone, or in combination with administrative data are being used for clinical, health services and population health research. Indeed, more rapid, efficient and innovative research capabilities for studying population accrual, randomization, monitoring, outcome assessment, intervention and knowledge translation are possible with new information technologies. Canada has enjoyed the long-standing advantage of having relatively comprehensive population-level health administrative databases to conduct novel health services research. Canada is also investing in an inter-operable Canadian EHR to enhance access, continuity, safety and quality of care as well as public health surveillance. To establish strategic policy directions for the research community that will optimize the use of EHR and health information technologies, syntheses are requested that will address the following areas: 1) describe the uses of EHR and other health information technologies for clinical, health services and population health research including the context, conditions, value, barriers and lessons learned for future implementation, 2) estimate improvements in using EHR to conduct research in efficiency, quality, cost, and/or novel research capacity in relation to identifying study populations and accrual, intervention implementation, outcome assessment, knowledge translation, and other resource-intensive activities, 3) identify existing methods and legislative frameworks being used to obtain consent, acknowledge, and notify patients on the use of electronic record data for research internationally, and synthesize information about the impact of differences in approach on research productivity (e.g. time to access data, number of researchers, grants, publications, funding amounts, researcher retention), quality and innovative capacity.

CIHR - Institute of Human Development, Child and Youth Health (IHDCYH)
IHDCYH supports research that ensures the best start in life for all Canadians and the achievement of their potential for optimal growth and development. Through our support, researchers address a wide range of health concerns, including those associated with reproduction, early development, childhood, and adolescence.

Strategic Research Priorities.

CIHR - Institute of Infection and Immunity (III)
III is leading the Pandemic Preparedness Research Initiative (PPRI) to develop a coordinated and focused research effort and to build influenza and pandemic preparedness research capacity in Canada. Under this Initiative, III is supporting operating and team grants, capacity building and multidisciplinary approaches to pandemic preparedness. The ultimate goal is that the new knowledge will allow Canada and others around the world to prevent or mitigate an influenza pandemic or to be better prepared to respond to a pandemic should one arise. See the Institute's website for more information about the PPRI.

There are opportunities to learn from research work carried out during the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) and other disease outbreaks. III will provide funding for research synthesis projects that summarize this information and develop recommendations that will contribute to pandemic preparedness planning and control.

CIHR - Institute of Population and Public Health
The CIHR Institute of Population and Public Health (IPPH) will support:

1. research into the complex interactions (biological, social, cultural, environmental), which determine the health of individuals, communities, and global populations; and
2. the application of that knowledge to improve the health of both populations and individuals, through strategic partnerships with population and public health stakeholders, and innovative research funding programs.

The Ontario HIV Treatment Network (OHTN)
The Ontario HIV Treatment Network (OHTN), established in 1998 and funded by the AIDS Bureau of the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, is an independent, not-for-profit, multi-stakeholder organization committed to finding innovative ways to improve care and treatment for people with HIV and enhance prevention strategies for communities at risk. The OHTN is a network of consumers, providers, researchers and government policy makers working together to develop and share new knowledge, and shape HIV policy and practice in Ontario.

The goals of the OHTN to 2010 are:

• To improve the health and well being of people with HIV in Ontario
• To contribute to HIV prevention efforts in Ontario
• To promote knowledge transfer and exchange among all HIV stakeholders
• To ensure value for resources

Over the next five years, the OHTN will pursue a range of focused strategic activities that will influence the broader determinants of health, and have a measurable impact on the health and quality of life of people living with HIV/AIDS and those communities at risk.

The OHTN supports research in prevention, care, treatment, support and the social determinants of health in the following streams: basic, clinical science, sociobehavioural, epidemiological and community-based research.  

The Ontario HIV Treatment Network will provide up to $300,000 to support eligible applications from Ontario with a focus on HIV/AIDS, prevention, risk behaviours, and/or high risk populations. (Updated: 2007-05-22)

CNIB E.A. Baker Grants (Updated: 2007-03-07)

CNIB - areas of interest for the Research Synthesis include:

• Stigma associated with blindness and low vision
• Co-morbidities: visual impairment and depression
• Aging with visual impairment

The Canadian Stroke Network (Updated: 2006-12-21)

The Canadian Stroke Network's mission is to reduce the impact of stroke on Canadians through collaborations that create valuable new knowledge in stroke; to ensure the best knowledge is applied; and to build Canadian capacity in stroke. We envision that by 2013, Canadian individuals, families, and society will benefit from measurable improvements in stroke prevention, treatment and rehabilitation.

The CIHR Knowledge Translation Branch and the partners will provide funding for applications that are relevant to (in alignment with) the objectives and research priority areas described above.

Prior to peer review, the Knowledge Translation Branch and the partners will have access to anonymized project titles and summaries to conduct relevance review.

Upon completion of peer review, the Knowledge Translation Branch and the partners will receive the ranking list, merit scores (ratings) and recommendations on funding level and award term for the applications that fall in the fundable range and have been determined to be relevant to the specific research areas and objectives of the initiative. The list will be used for funding decision-making purposes and will remain anonymous.

The review of applications for relevance to the strategic initiative will have no impact on the peer review process.

Eligibility

Eligibility criteria for all CIHR research funding programs apply. The business office of the institution of an eligible Nominated Principal Applicant generally administers CIHR funds. Please refer to the Eligibility Requirements for CIHR Grants and Awards regarding the eligibility requirements for individuals and institutions.

Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) will not be considered under this RFA.

Specific Eligibility Requirements

Eligibility requirements specific to this Request for Applications include the following:

• Decision-maker partners must be part of the team;
• Both decision-makers and researchers are eligible applicants;
• Proposals must involve at least one decision-maker as an applicant on the team or through a significant advisory mechanism;
• To be eligible for support, an application must include a clear, explicit, and manageable knowledge translation plan, which specifies the intended audience (s), the means of involvement and communication, and the intended post-grant follow-up (see below under "Evaluation Criteria" for more detail);
• Health technology assessment is NOT an eligible area under this RFA;
• Infrastructure and activities of Canadian Cochrane entities funded through other CIHR awards will NOT be supported through this RFA.

Guidelines

This Request for Applications will follow the CIHR Guidelines for Grant Programs. Applicants are encouraged to demonstrate the use of Gender and Sex-Based Analysis in applications.

Allowable Costs

Applicants should review the Tri-Agency (CIHR, NSERC and SSHRC) financial administration guidelines Use of Grant Funds (Compensation-Related Expenses) (external site) for a complete listing and description of allowable costs and activities.

The full application must provide a detailed justification of all costs.

Grants should NOT be used:

• As bridging or emergency funding
• To support ongoing studies

In addition, the following expenditures will be considered eligible for funding received through this Request for Applications.

• Equipment, Maintenance and Service costs:
  • Purchase and maintenance of research equipment and other research tools
• Salary Costs:
  • The salary (ies) of research assistants
• Knowledge Translation Related Costs:
  • Regional, national and international networking and exchange activities during the planning and dissemination of the research synthesis (e.g. networking, conferences, workshops, meetings, communication and dissemination methods). Eligible activities must involve substantive and meaningful interaction between researchers and intended users and relevant stakeholders
• Costs associated with the creation and distribution of communication tools (e.g. plain language summaries or other mechanisms)

Conditions of Funding

All conditions specified in CIHR General Grants and Awards Policies shall apply to applications funded through this Request for Applications. Conditions cover areas such as Applicant and Institutional Responsibilities, Ethics, Official language policy, Access to Information and Privacy Acts, and Acknowledgement of CIHR Support. Successful applicants will be informed of any special financial conditions prior to the release of funds or when they receive CIHR's Authorization for Funding (AFF) document.

In addition to CIHR standard guidelines and requirements, the following special conditions shall apply:

Within six months after the end of the grant's term, the Nominated Principal Applicant is required to submit the following three (3) documents:

• a final performance report, summarizing the results and describing how the grant funds were used. A standard form will be provided by CIHR.
• a one-page report outlining the Knowledge Translation Activities undertaken and a summary of the researcher's (or research team's) knowledge translation experience and impressions (e.g., what worked well, what did not work well and why).
• a copy of the final synthesis/review.

In order to meet the information needs of health care decision-makers, funded applicants will be expected to prepare a final report (point number 3 above). The researcher will make this report available to CIHR. CIHR will (may) forward this reports to officials reporting to federal, provincial and territorial Ministers of Health. Reports should be in a form and format suitable to these audiences, and the Executive Summary will be written in a form and format as prescribed by CIHR. CIHR reserves the right to publish this report on the CIHR website, and requests that the report will be made available by the research teams on a website of their choice, to which reference can be made on the CIHR web site.

Access to Information Act and Privacy Act, and the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA)

All personal information collected by CIHR about applicants is used to review applications, to recruit reviewers, to administer and monitor grants and awards, to compile statistics, and to promote and support health research in Canada. Consistent with these purposes, applicants should also expect that information collected by CIHR may be shared as described in Use and Disclosure of Personal Information Provided to CIHR for Peer Review.

CIHR as a federal entity is subject to the Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act, therefore the requirements of these two statutes will apply to all information located in CIHR's premises including, without limitation, cost-sharing agreements related to this Request for Applications and all matters pertaining thereto.

While respecting the application of the Privacy Act to federal entities, all signing parties involved in a collaborative agreement will also be bound by the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA). All personal information (as identified by the PIPEDA) collected, used or disclosed in the course of any commercial activity under collaborative agreements related to the Request for Applications will be collected, used and disclosed in compliance with the PIPEDA.

Communication Requirements

Grant recipients are required to acknowledge CIHR, its institutes and partners in any communication or publication related to the project. See CIHR General Grants and Awards Policies, Public Communication and Acknowledgement of CIHR's Support for details on CIHR's communication requirements. The contributing institutes / partners will be identified on the Authorization for Funding and decision letter.

Performance Measurement

CIHR is committed to demonstrating results to Canadians for the money invested in health research. Therefore, processes for monitoring progress and appropriate use of funds, as well as for performance measurement and program evaluation are in place. As a result, funding recipients must:

• contribute to the monitoring, review and evaluation of CIHR's programs, policies and processes by participating in evaluation studies, surveys, workshops, audits and providing data or reports as required for the purpose of collecting information to assess progress and results;
• encourage their associates, trainees and administration to participate in the monitoring, review and evaluation of CIHR's programs, policies and processes as required.

Review Process and Evaluation

A CIHR peer review committee will evaluate the full applications. The committee may be drawn from one of CIHR's pre-existing committees or may be created specifically for this Request for Applications. Committee members are selected based on suggestions from many sources including the institute(s) / portfolio(s) and partner(s), following CIHR's Policy on Confidentiality, Conflict of Interest and Privacy Issues in Peer and Relevance Review (CCIP). For information on CIHR's peer review process in general, see Peer Review.

Peer review will be conducted in accordance with The CIHR Peer Review Process - Policies and Responsibilities of Grants Committee Members, including the standard evaluation criteria described under "Factors for Assessment" (section 6.2).

In addition, the following evaluation criteria specific to this Request for Applications will apply. CIHR recognizes that applications will emphasize different approaches to research and to knowledge translation, therefore reviewers and committees are expected to weight criteria such as these differently from one application to another.

The full application will be evaluated against the following:

• Applicants must include end users as part of the team in defining the scope of the knowledge synthesis/domain of investigation and methods to ensure timeliness and relevance of the topic and uptake of the product. End users may include health care and public health practitioners, program administrators, and/or policy-makers, research users, patients, family members of patients, etc.
• Applicants must submit letter(s) of reference from the decision-maker partner(s) indicating the importance of the systematic/scoping review in relation to their mandate and how they might be utilizing the research synthesis.
• Appropriate sources and levels of evidence to be included (or excluded) in the scoping or systematic review must be clearly identified.
• Proposed methods for conducting the review must be appropriate, rigorous and feasible; potential problems must be identified and contingencies offered.

In context to the above, the application should include a research plan and a knowledge translation plan which addresses the following criteria:

a) The Research Plan

Research Proposed:

• How important and/or original are the contributions expected from the research proposed? What is the potential for important new observations or knowledge from the research-users' perspective?
• To what extent have the applicants identified the relevance of the research to be synthesized/reviewed: e.g. provided evidence of an environmental scan of existing or ongoing scoping reviews and systematic reviews to ensure that their proposed work is unique?
• How appropriate and rigorous is the proposed methodology? How well have the applicants anticipated difficulties in their approach and considered alternatives? How clearly have the applicants outlined their proposed methods for the review of evidence, including methods for identifying, selecting and appraising peer reviewed literature and grey literature, as well as methods for consulting with relevant stakeholders where relevant?
• To what extent did the researchers identify databases and literature searches in collaboration with partners?
• To what extent did researchers and decision-maker partners decide on approach and timing of synthesis?
• Is there a plan for the researchers and partners to present and discuss project progress and other ideas mid-project?⁵
• Is there a plan, near completion of the project, for the researchers and partners to review the final results of the synthesis and the partners assist with the crafting of relevant recommendations for end-users as well researchers and partners finalize the dissemination plans (including roles in dissemination)?

"Fit" (responsiveness)

• Applicants should describe the alignment of the proposed project with at least one of the identified thematic areas identified by one/more of the CIHR Institutes or CIHR's KT strategic plan.
• Collaboration. Identify and appropriately engage key stakeholders in the proposed methodology.
• The Applicant(s)' Productivity, Experience and Training:
• How appropriate to the research proposed is the training or track record of the applicant(s) in terms of research, research synthesis and knowledge translation? How relevant is the recent research of the applicant(s)?
• What experience does the research team have in scoping reviews and/or research syntheses?

b) Knowledge Translation Plan

The Knowledge Translation Plan will be evaluated based on the following criteria:

• Appropriateness of intended user audiences (for example, specific research communities and/or research funding organizations for scoping reviews, and/or specific policy-maker, practitioner and /or managerial audiences for research syntheses),
• Potential for uptake and use of synthesized knowledge by users as a result of the knowledge translation strategies, including the intention of the researcher to involve intended users early in the research process,
• Experience of the researcher and partners with relevant or intended user audiences,
• Appropriateness of evidence-based approaches or innovative strategies with sound justification for potential effectiveness,
• Quality of the strategy for addressing key contextual challenges to the uptake and use of synthesized knowledge,
• Feasibility of the Knowledge Translation Plan with respect to the work plan and resources available.
• Role of the partner in dissemination activities & level of commitment of the decision-maker partner: demonstrated through the letter(s) of reference/support from the decision-maker partner(s)(s) which indicates the importance of the syntheses/review in relation to their mandate and how they will be utilizing the review.

How to Apply

The application process is comprised of two steps: Registration and Full Application.

Review the application instructions provided in How to Apply for Funding.

Select "Operating Grants" (Registration and Application) from the Grant Programs Application Packages.

Additional instructions must be followed for this RFA:

• In the Research Funding Program section of the Research Module, select "Strategic Initiative/RFA" and enter the title of this RFA.
• Research Module:

The research proposal section of the Research Module for this initiative is limited to a maximum of 9 pages, including figures and tables plus the Summary of Research Proposal (p. 9). One of the nine pages of the research proposal must e entitled "Knowledge Translation Plan". References may be listed in additional pages. The summary of progress (pg.10) and the response to previous reviews (pages 11a & 11b) should not be submitted. Please ensure that the following are addressed in the research proposal (the number of pages listed below for each component are guidelines only).

0.5 - 2 pages (maximum) - describe the importance of the problem and the relevance of the review to policy makers.

3 - 4 pages - describe the methods, detailing sources of data, inclusion/exclusion criteria, critical appraisal techniques, methods for synthesizing findings, and strategies to ensure methodological rigor

0.5 - 1 page - describe how decision makers will be engaged during the project

1 page - describe the KT plan

0.5 - 1 page - describe how the proposed project addresses syntheses objectives and meets the relevant area of research

The proposal is 9 pages maximum.

• Common CV Module:
  • You must submit full common CV modules for the Nominated Principal Applicant, Principal Applicants, and one Co-Applicant/Decision-maker partner(s) of the team. Only abbreviated CVs (maximum 3 pages) are required for any additional Co-Applicants. Full CVs will not be considered for these applicants. The first page of the CV should only include the contact information of the applicant (mailing address, telephone number, fax number and e-mail address, and CIHR PIN number). This information must be kept separate from the rest of the CV because it will not be forwarded to reviewers. All applicants must have a CV and a CIHR PIN number. The second and third page of the CV should include information on current grants held including % budgetary overlap with any current grant, relevant publications from the last five years, and expertise keywords.
• Budget Module:
  • Clearly justify all budget items (including the costs of travel, workshops, etc.). Courier the original and 6 copies of the full application by the application deadline
• Letter(s) of reference from the decision-maker partner(s) indicating commitment to utilize the final review/syntheses.

Send the completed registration and application packages by courier to:

RE: "Research Syntheses/Knowledge Syntheses: Knowledge Translation"
Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Room 97, 160 Elgin Street
Address locator: 4809A
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0W9

Contact Information

For questions on CIHR funding guidelines, how to apply, and the peer review process contact:

Christine Charette
Program Delivery Coordinator
Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Telephone: (613) 941-0848
Fax: (613) 954-1800
Email: ccharette@cihr-irsc.gc.ca

For questions about this initiative and research objectives contact:

Loretta Wong
Knowledge Exchange Specialist
Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Telephone: (613) 941-4437
Fax: (613) 954-1800
Email: lwong@cihr-irsc.gc.ca

Partner/Collaborator Description

Note: Additional partners, including partners from industry and the private sector are expected to join this funding initiative over the coming year.

Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR)
CIHR is Canada's major federal funding agency for health research. Its objective is to excel, according to internationally accepted standards of scientific excellence, in the creation of new knowledge and its translation into improved health for Canadians, more effective health services and products and a strengthened Canadian health care system.

CIHR - Knowledge Translation Branch (KT)
The role of the CIHR Knowledge Translation (KT) Branch is to create, support, monitor and sustain an environment that allows CIHR to deliver on its KT mandate. Fulfilling its corporate KT function, the KT Branch provides a focal point for KT as CIHR leads broad KT strategic initiatives and provides support to multi or pan-Institute KT initiatives.

CIHR - Clinical Research Initiative (CRI)
The CIHR Clinical Research Initiative promotes and wishes to expand clinical research networks that can rapidly conduct high-quality clinical and translational research studies that address multiple research questions. By working together toward common goals, Clinical Research Networks will improve the way the Canadian Clinical Research Enterprise works, connects, interacts and shares information. Through direct collaboration with clinical research professionals from across the Nation, Clinical Research Networks will be key in the improvement of the clinical research enterprise, fostering communication and sharing of best practices. 

CIHR - Institute of Gender and Health (IGH)
IGH supports research that addresses how sex (biological-genetic dimensions) and gender (social-cultural dimensions) interact with other socio-cultural, bio-physical, and political-economic factors to influence health and create conditions that differ with respect to risk factors or effective interventions for males and females throughout the lifespan. The objectives of the Institute for Gender and Health are to (1) generate evidence regarding the impact of sex and gender on health status, health behaviour, and health services use throughout the life span; (2) enhance understanding of how gender, sex and health interact with other health determinants; (3) provide evidence to inform the design of programs, policies and practices; (4) build the capacity of gender and health researchers in Canada; and (5) advance the gender and health perspective nationally and internationally.

CIHR - Institute of Health Services and Policy Research (IHSPR)
IHSPR is dedicated to supporting innovative research, capacity-building and knowledge translation initiatives designed to improve the way health care services are organized, regulated, managed, financed, paid for, used and delivered, in the interest of improving the health and quality of life of all Canadians.

CIHR - Institute of Human Development, Child and Youth Health (IHDCYH)
IHDCYH supports research that ensures the best start in life for all Canadians and the achievement of their potential for optimal growth and development

CIHR - Institute of Infection and Immunity (III)
The CIHR Institute of Infection and Immunity supports research to enhance immune-mediated health and to reduce the burden of infectious disease, immune-mediated disease, and allergy through prevention strategies, screening, diagnosis, treatment, support systems, and palliation.

CIHR - Institute of Population and Public Health
IPPH supports research into the complex interactions, which determine health, and its application to improve the health of individuals, communities and global populations.

Partners

The Ontario HIV Treatment Network
The Ontario HIV Treatment Network (OHTN), established in 1998 and funded by the AIDS Bureau of the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, is an independent, not-for-profit, multi-stakeholder organization committed to finding innovative ways to improve care and treatment for people with HIV and enhance prevention strategies for communities at risk.

The Canadian Stroke Network (Updated: 2006-12-21)

The Canadian Stroke Network's mission is to reduce the impact of stroke on Canadians through collaborations that create valuable new knowledge in stroke; to ensure the best knowledge is applied; and to build Canadian capacity in stroke. We envision that by 2013, Canadian individuals, families, and society will benefit from measurable improvements in stroke prevention, treatment and rehabilitation.

Additional Information

1. Lavis JN, Posada FB, Haines A, Osei E. Use of research to inform public policymaking. Lancet. 2004 Oct 30;364(9445):1615-21.
2. Lavis JN, Davies HTO, Oxman A, Denis J-L, Golden-Biddle K, Ferlie E. Towards systematic reviews that inform healthcare management and policymaking. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy; 2005 Jul;10 Suppl 1:35-48
3. Lavis JN, Posada FB, Haines A, Osei E. Use of research to inform public policymaking. Lancet. 2004 Oct 30;364(9445) :1615-21.
4. Kiefer L, Frank J, Di Ruggiero E, Dobbins M, et al. Fostering Evidence-based Decision-making in Canada: Examining the Need for a Canadian Population and Public Health Evidence Centre and Research Network. Can J of Public Health; Ottawa: May-June 2005. Vol. 96, Iss. 3; p. l1 (40 pages)
5. Canadian Health Services Research Foundation website. (September 25, 2006)