Dissemination of Health-Related Research among Scientists in Three Countries: Access to Resources and Current Practices
Table 2
Regression of predictor variables on self-rated disseminationa effort separately for each country and pooled (unadjusted and adjusted for country) OR (95% CI).
Dissemination characteristics
Brazil
United Kingdom
United States
Pooled (crude)
Pooled (adjb)
Reasons
Influence policy OR to influence practice
2.1 (0.5–8.3)
5.5 (0.9–35.0)
4.5 (1.2–16.5)
3.8 (1.7–8.7)
3.8 (1.7–8.8)
To satisfy grant/contractual obligations
0.5 (0.2–1.3)
1.1 (0.4–3.0)
0.9 (0.5–1.7)
0.7 (0.5–1.2)
0.8 (0.5–1.3)
Resources
Unit/department/school has formal communication/dissemination strategy
3.0 (1.4–6.5)
—c
1.8 (0.9–3.6)
2.4 (1.5–3.9)
2.9 (1.8–4.7)
Dedicated person/team for dissemination in unit/organization
1.7 (0.8–3.5)
2.6 (0.7–9.6)
1.3 (0.7–2.4)
1.2 (0.8–1.9)
1.6 (1.0–2.5)
Methods/actions
Frequency that research summaries/key messages are written for specific nonresearch audiences
5.9 (3.5–9.9)
4.8 (2.2–10.1)
21.9 (10.7–44.9)
8.5 (6.0–12.0)
8.2 (5.8–11.7)
Stage in the research process when planning dissemination-related activities
3.2 (1.5–6.7)
3.2 (0.98–10.2)
3.9 (2.4–6.6)
2.8 (2.0–4.0)
3.3 (2.3–4.7)
The reference category is poor (versus excellent/good); badjusted for country w/dummy variables; ccould not be estimated due to small cell sizes.
