Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
This paper describes a series of three randomized controlled case studies comparing the effectiveness of three strategies for communicating new research-based knowledge (Diffusion, Dissemination, Translation), to different Assistive Technology (AT) stakeholder groups. Pre and post intervention measures for level of knowledge use (unaware, aware, interested, using) via the LOKUS instrument, assessed the relative effectiveness of the three strategies. The latter two approaches were both more effective than diffusion but also equally effective. The results question the value added by tailoring research findings to specific audiences, and instead supports the critical yet neglected role for relevance in determining knowledge use by stakeholders.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!