@article{fdi:010074460,
  title = {{A} deliberative dialogue as a knowledge translation strategy on road traffic injuries in {B}urkina {F}aso : a mixed-method evaluation},
  author = {{M}c {S}ween-{C}adieux, {E}. and {D}agenais, {C}. and {R}idde, {V}al{\'e}ry},
  editor = {},
  language = {{ENG}},
  abstract = {{I}ntroduction: {D}eliberative dialogues are increasingly being used, particularly on the {A}frican continent. {T}hey are a promising interactive knowledge translation strategy that brings together and leverages the knowledge of diverse stakeholders important to the resolution of a societal issue. {F}ollowing a research project carried out in {B}urkina {F}aso on road traffic injuries, a 1-day workshop in the form of a deliberative dialogue was organised in {N}ovember 2015. {T}he workshop brought together actors involved in road safety, such as researchers, police and fire brigades, health professionals, non-governmental and civil society organisations, and representatives of government structures. {T}he objective was to present the research results, propose recommendations to improve the situation and develop a collective action plan. {M}ethod: {T}o better understand the workshop's utility and effects, a mixed-method evaluation was conducted. {D}ata were obtained from two questionnaires distributed at the end of the workshop (n = 37) and 14 qualitative interviews with participants 6-10 weeks after the workshop. {D}escriptive statistics were used to analyse the quantitative data, and a thematic analysis was conducted for the qualitative data. {R}esults {T}he data revealed several positive impacts of the workshop, such as the acquisition of new knowledge about road safety, the opportunity for participants to learn from each other, the creation of post-workshop collaborations, and individual behaviour changes. {H}owever, several challenges were encountered that constrained the potential effects of the workshop, including the limited presence of political actors, the lack of engagement among participants to develop an action plan, and the difficulty in setting up a monitoring committee following the workshop. {C}onclusion {W}hile the deliberative workshop is not the standard format for reporting research results in {B}urkina {F}aso, this model should be reproduced in different contexts. {T}his interactive knowledge translation strategy is useful to benefit from the experiential knowledge of the various actors and to encourage their involvement in formulating recommendations.},
  keywords = {{D}eliberative workshop ; {K}nowledge translation ; {R}esearch dissemination ; {R}esearch utilisation ; {R}esearch use ; {E}valuation ; {R}oad safety ; {P}ublic health ; {B}urkina {F}aso ; {W}est {A}frica ; {BURKINA} {FASO}},
  booktitle = {},
  journal = {{H}ealth {R}esearch {P}olicy and {S}ystems},
  volume = {16},
  numero = {},
  pages = {art. 113 [13 ]},
  ISSN = {1478-4505},
  year = {2018},
  DOI = {10.1186/s12961-018-0388-8},
  URL = {https://www.documentation.ird.fr/hor/fdi:010074460},
}