Review Deliberative dialogues as a mechanism for knowledge translation and exchange in health systems decision-making Jennifer A. Boyko a, * , John N. Lavis a, b, c, d , Julia Abelson a, c, d , Maureen Dobbins e , Nancy Carter e a Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, 1200 Main St., West, Hamilton, ON, Canada L8N 3Z5 b McMaster Health Forum, Canada c Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, Canada d Department of Political Science, McMaster University, Canada e School of Nursing, McMaster University, Canada article info Article history: Available online 14 August 2012 Keywords: Critical interpretive synthesis Systematic review Deliberative dialogues Evidence-informed policy-making Knowledge translation and exchange Health systems abstract Models that describe the key features and intended effects of specific knowledge translation and exchange (KTE) interventions are much less prominent than models that provide a more general understanding of KTE. Our aim was to develop a model in order to describe the key features and intended effects of deliberative dialogues used as a KTE strategy and to understand how deliberative dialogues can support evidence-informed policymaking. By using critical interpretive synthesis, we identified 17 papers representing four fields of enquiry and integrated our findings into a model. The key features described in the model are: 1) an appropriate (i.e., conducive to the particular dialogue) meeting envi- ronment; 2) an appropriate mix of participants; and, 3) an appropriate use of research evidence. These features combine to create three types of intended effects: 1) short-term individual-level; 3) medium- term community/organizational-level; and, 3) long-term system-level. The concept of capacity building helps to explain the relationship between features and effects. The model is a useful contri- bution to the KTE field because it is a practical tool that could be used to guide the development and evaluation of deliberative dialogues in order to understand more about achieving particular outcomes in relation to specific issues or contexts. Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Background An important goal of system-level knowledge translation and exchange (KTE) is using evidence in decision-making about prob- lems or issues affecting the health system (Canadian Health Services Research Foundation (CHSRF), 2006). KTE is broadly defined as “a dynamic and iterative process that includes the synthesis, dissemination, exchange and ethically sound application of knowledge to improve health status, provide more effective health services and products, and strengthen the healthcare system” (Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), 2012; Graham et al., 2006). Although models exist to guide the devel- opment and evaluation of KTE interventions that aim to support evidence-informed policymaking (Contandriopoulos, Lemire, Denis, & Tremblay, 2010; Lavis, Lomas, Hamid, & Sewankambo, 2006; Lavis, Oxman, Lewin, & Fretheim, 2009), models that describe the key features and intended effects of specific inter- ventions are much less prominent. For example, a well-known model describes four domains of linking research to action in health systems decision-making: the general climate for research use; the production of relevant and appropriately synthesized research evidence for research users; activities that link research to action; and evaluation (Lavis et al., 2006). While this model provides a general understanding of system-level KTE, it is not clear which activities from these domains will work best in specific policy contexts (Lavis et al., 2006). It is also not clear how specific features of KTE activities might be tailored to achieve specific outcomes. For example, a KTE activity that aims to improve user-pull (i.e., users of research actively seek out and use research evidence in their decision-making) (Lavis et al., 2006) could benefit from knowing which decision-making processes might be tailored to support decision-makers in using research evidence. Evidence-informed models that identify the key features and intended effects of specific KTE interventions, as well as relationships between these, would be useful tools for research, teaching and planning. The models could be applied for different * Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: boykoja2@mcmaster.ca (J.A. Boyko), lavisj@mcmaster.ca (J.N. Lavis), abelsonj@mcmaster.ca (J. Abelson), dobbinsm@mcmaster.ca (M. Dobbins), carternm@mcmaster.ca (N. Carter). Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Social Science & Medicine journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/socscimed 0277-9536/$ e see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.06.016 Social Science & Medicine 75 (2012) 1938e1945