GRF · Research Nexus
Risk knowledge translation
Evidence that is sound in a journal can still be unusable for a ministry: too slow, too narrow, written for a different question or silent on uncertainty. Knowledge translation is the set of practices that bring research and institutional decisions together, from synthesis and briefing to co-production and embedded advisers. This page sets out how translation works, where it distorts evidence, and how its quality and uptake can be judged without confusing citation with influence.
How the work runs.
Evidence synthesis workspace
Risk knowledge translation · Science-policy panel · Synthesis SY-78
- Records found2213
- Screened831Active
- Included58Normal
- Reviewer agreement0.87kappaNormal
Systematic review
- QuestionPICO
- Protocolregistered
- Search6 databases
- Screentwo reviewers
- Extractform v2
- Appraisecertainty
- Briefpolicy owner
Certainty of evidence
| Reduced losses | 9 | Moderate | Benefit |
| Faster recovery | 6 | Low | Unclear |
| Equity of access | 4 | Very low | Unclear |
Fig.Evidence synthesis workspace: example names and illustrative values, not a record or a live system.
Risk knowledge translation: how the risk develops.
Making evidence useful to institutions. The dossier below sets out how the risk develops, what is measured, where the data come from, how it is modelled and who decides.
Questions are mismatched
Researchers answer the questions their field rewards; institutions need answers framed by mandate, budget cycle and legal duty. The gap lies in framing and timing, not only in communication.
Uncertainty is stripped
Each step from paper to synthesis to brief to statement tends to drop caveats and ranges. A cautious estimate becomes a confident line, and the decision rests on a certainty the evidence never claimed.
Uptake is selective
Institutions draw on evidence that supports positions already held, and advocates package evidence for a cause. Uptake then reflects interests as much as quality, which citation counts alone cannot show.
Feedback is missing
Researchers rarely learn how their evidence was used or why it was set aside. Without that loop, translation practice does not improve and the same mismatches recur in the next decision.
How risk knowledge translation is governed: instruments, mandates and commitments.
The instruments, mandates, actors and accountability arrangements a policymaker, diplomat or development agency works with, citing the agreements that set them. Structures follow the frameworks named. Any state or progress drawn is illustrative, not a record.
Who holds which role
The actors around risk knowledge translation: who decides, who implements, who finances and who brings knowledge and voice.
What is measured, and how well.
Each indicator carries its unit, its cadence, the kind of source behind it and the evidence label a value would carry. No values are shown: a programme supplies them under its own authority.
| Indicator | Unit | Cadence | Source type | Label |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Policy documents citing research on a theme | count per period | annual | Policy document citation indexes | REPORTED |
| Evidence syntheses commissioned by public bodies | count per year | annual | Procurement and commissioning records | Published statistics |
| Time from synthesis request to delivery | weeks | per request | Commissioning records | REPORTED |
| Briefs that state uncertainty and limits | percent of briefs reviewed | annual | Content review of briefs | ESTIMATED |
| Embedded researcher and fellowship placements | count of placements | annual | Programme records | REPORTED |
| Open access status of cited evidence | percent of cited works | annual | Bibliometric records | OBSERVED |
| Evidence statements in regulatory impact assessments | presence per assessment | per decision | Published impact assessments | Published statistics |
Where the evidence comes from.
Named public datasets and institutional records, each with its licence class. Sources by agreement are used only under their terms and never republished.
| Source | What it gives | Licence class |
|---|---|---|
| Overton policy document index | Links between documents from governments and agencies and the research they cite | Commercial licence |
| OpenAlex | Open access status and citation links for cited works | Open, CC0 |
| Cochrane Library and Campbell Collaboration | Systematic reviews with standard methods and plain-language summaries | Free to read; reuse terms per review |
| Parliamentary science office briefings | Briefings written for legislators, such as POST notes and EPTA network reports | Open Parliament Licence or terms per office |
| OECD Global Science Forum reports | Comparative analysis of science advice and the use of research across member countries | Free to read, OECD terms |
| INGSA resources | Case studies and practice guidance on science advice and knowledge brokerage | Free to read, terms per resource |
| Published regulatory impact assessments | Statements of the evidence used in individual regulatory decisions | Open government terms, by jurisdiction |
Who decides, and what the evidence serves.
Research Nexus prepares evidence. The decisions below are taken by the authorities named, under their own rules, and never by the platform.
| Who decides | The question | Evidence this page serves |
|---|---|---|
| Chief scientific advisers and departmental science units | How to commission rapid evidence for a decision under time pressure | Comparative practice on rapid synthesis; known failure modes when uncertainty is compressed |
| Parliamentary science and technology offices | What a briefing must state about confidence and disagreement | Translation practice from other legislatures; checklists on uncertainty language |
| Research funders | Whether to fund knowledge brokerage, fellowships or co-production alongside research | Evaluations of brokerage schemes, with their stated limitations |
| Ministries and regulators | How to record which evidence a decision relied on and which it set aside | Examples of evidence statements in impact assessments; dialogue records on their use |
Outputs this topic produces
- Peer learning briefs comparing translation practice across institutions
- Guidance notes on carrying uncertainty from synthesis to brief
- Methods seminars on rapid evidence synthesis and its limits
- Dialogue records with institutions on evidence they could not use, and why
What knowledge translation asks.
- What does the body of evidence, not a single study, say about this question?
- How certain is it, and how should that uncertainty be communicated to non-specialists?
- Does evidence from one context apply in another, and what would need to be adapted?
- What would help this institution use this evidence: a brief, a tool, a conversation, a secondment?
What helps and what hinders.
Trust and contact
Research consistently finds that ongoing relationships between researchers and users matter more than any single product.
Windows of opportunity
Evidence is used when it arrives as decisions are being shaped, not after.
Local fit
Findings that ignore local institutions, resources and values are rarely used, or are misapplied.
Why now: crises of recent years showed how evidence can be lost between a study and a decision, through jargon, timing or unclear uncertainty. Research Nexus convenes the people on both sides of that handover, tests translation formats in dialogue and exercises, and records which formats decision holders could actually use.
How evidence is translated.
Translation works best as a portfolio rather than a single product. Each instrument below has a place, and each carries a characteristic way of distorting evidence if it is used alone.
- 01
Systematic reviews and rapid reviews
Structured synthesis of all relevant studies. Limits: full reviews are slow; rapid reviews trade rigour for speed and should say so.
- 02
Evidence briefs
Short, structured summaries for decision-makers. Limits: compression can lose important caveats.
- 03
Uncertainty communication
Ranges, confidence language and scenarios, grounded in probability and statistics. Limits: audiences interpret verbal probability terms very differently.
- 04
Knowledge brokers
People or units that work between research and institutions. Limits: often underfunded and dependent on individuals.
How it is studied, and what the methods cannot say.
- 01Policy, institutional and decision scienceComparing science advice systems · Mapping integrity proceduresApplied here
- 02Causal inference and impact evaluationEvaluating funder policy changes · Assessing knowledge brokerage schemesApplied here
- 03Probability and statisticsBuilding bibliometric indicators · Detecting selective reportingApplied here
Questions and answers.
Is a policy citation a measure of impact?
What is co-production?
Why does uncertainty disappear in briefs?
Does Research Nexus advise governments?
Is knowledge translation just communication?
Who writes evidence briefs?
How should uncertainty be presented to decision-makers?
Does Research Nexus take positions on contested evidence?
Contribute evidence from this page.
Reports is the Consortium's quarterly publication. What you know about this subject can become evidence, a case or a correction in the next edition, credited to you and published under CC BY 4.0 where it is your own work.
- EmailGateway GW-GRFSend it from this pageEvidence, a correction, a case, a method, a review, a translation or profile input. It arrives tagged with this page, so the editor who owns it receives it.
- ZenodoOpen depositDeposit it and submit to the communityPublish your own record on Zenodo with your ORCID iD, then submit it to the Reports community there. Curators review it; the DOI stays yours.
- ReportsGlobal Risks ForumSee every way to contributeThe contribution types, how each is reviewed, what credit you receive, the licence and what is never accepted.
Never send personal data, sensitive infrastructure detail or anything you have no right to share. A contribution is reviewed before use; sending it confers no authorship or editorial rights, and sponsorship never buys a finding.
Bring a governance question to the Forum.
Information and enquiries are open today. An enquiry receives a reference and names the next step; applications, payments, compute allocations and registrations open only when their team, terms and review capacity exist.
Legal documents.
Show all 18 legal documents
Maps, data and figures on this site are shown for context and general information. They are not advice, forecasts or warnings; the limits of the information are set out in the Disclaimers and Data Notices.