# Knowledge user perspectives on integrated knowledge translation (iKT) in health interventions research for people with multiple sclerosis: a qualitative descriptive study

## TL;DR

This study explores how people involved in MS research view working together with researchers throughout the process to improve health interventions.

## Contribution

It provides new insights into the practical use of iKT in MS research through qualitative analysis of stakeholder perspectives.

## Key findings

- Five key themes emerged, including defining iKT and the importance of networking.
- Participants emphasized the need for clearer definitions and better representation in iKT partnerships.
- Barriers and facilitators to iKT engagement were identified, suggesting areas for improvement.

## Abstract

Integrated knowledge translation (iKT) represents an approach to optimizing health interventions research through active collaboration between researchers and knowledge users throughout the research process. To date, few studies have explored the process of engaging in iKT, particularly in the context of multiple sclerosis (MS) research. Building on a larger iKT-informed study exploring mindfulness-based interventions for people living with MS, this study explores the perspectives of iKT panellists and extended collaborators on the use of iKT in health research.

This qualitative descriptive study utilized one-on-one semi-structured interviews conducted using Zoom or Microsoft Teams. Interviews were 20–30 min in duration. An interview guide informed by the Ontario Brain Institute’s framework for patient engagement across the stages of research was used. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, coded, and analyzed using inductive thematic analysis.

A total of eight iKT partners were interviewed, five were members of the iKT panel and three were extended collaborators. Five themes on the use of iKT in health interventions research on MS were identified: (1) defining iKT, (2) motivation and meaningful participation in iKT, (3) the importance of networking in iKT, (4) balancing multiple perspectives, and (5) barriers and facilitators to engaging in iKT. Within these themes, interviewees highlighted the need for further definition and operationalization of concepts. Discussion on the representativeness of iKT partners and recruitment of ‘hard to reach’ knowledge users was also salient.

The findings from this study provide useful considerations for other teams using an iKT approach. Future research directions include finding/maximizing meaningful ways for knowledge users to participate, exploring ways in which knowledge users could lead/co-lead (rather than consult on) research activities, and examining the potential role of an iKT facilitator.

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40900-025-00763-7.

Integrated knowledge translation (iKT) in health interventions research is an approach that involves actively collaborating with a variety of people such as patients, health care providers, and policy decision-makers. This means working with these groups at each stage of the research process (e.g., designing a study, collecting data, analyzing and interpreting data, and sharing the results of the study). By conducting research this way, the interventions produced from these studies are thought to be more relevant, effective, and long-lasting for everyone.

However, the process of doing this type of research has not been thoroughly explored, especially in the context of multiple sclerosis (MS) research. Therefore, we interviewed a variety of people with experience conducting or contributing to this kind of research. In these interviews, many highlighted the need for further clarification of terminology. Discussions on who tends to participate in iKT research and whether their perspectives represent the ‘typical’ experience also occurred during interviews.

The findings from this study provide useful considerations for other teams that are interested in using an iKT approach. Future research directions include finding and maximizing meaningful ways for people to participate, exploring ways in which non-researchers can lead/co-lead (rather than consult on) research activities, and examining the potential role of an iKT facilitator.

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40900-025-00763-7.