Q&A with Dr Hazel Dalton: How knowledge translation aids rural suicide prevention

Knowledge translation is the process used to take research findings and effectively apply them in real world settings to improve real world outcomes. It involves the synthesis, sharing and discussion of research with knowledge users (community, health and care providers and policymakers) to bridge the gap between research and practice.

Knowledge translation is best when it is integrated such that the real world informs what research questions are asked, how results are interpreted and how this information should be shared. Hence the importance of including people with a relevant lived experience, community, professionals and policymakers as appropriate. Suitable research methods include action research and expert guided panels (including experts by practice, place and lived experience as well as research discipline). This should be planned for, but being flexible, looking for and responding to opportunities is an important aspect of knowledge translation – you cannot see all opportunities ahead of time.

Knowledge translation is particularly important to suicide prevention given the complexity and heterogeneity of the challenge. There is a great need for sensitivity in the translation of findings into knowledge products and how it informs interventions. This benefits from ongoing consultation and sense-checking with the community and those with a lived experience of suicidal ideation and/or bereavement.

Knowledge translation can support these activities by sharing evidence-informed frameworks, tools and resources. For collaborative approaches, communities need to consider what positive wellbeing looks like at the community level as well as paying attention to what enables an effective collaborative group to function towards these goals.

Whilst effective media campaigns and online support can aid in suicide prevention and building knowledge, approaches to preventing suicide in regional and rural communities need to include place-based approaches. In the area in which I have most experience, collaborative approaches to community wellbeing, these have been place-based initiatives. Supporting communities to define what they mean by wellbeing, what they would like to do, encouraging a strengths-based framing (life-affirming) appear to have most traction. That said, these initiatives usually take a multi-faceted approach to building wellbeing and preventing suicide, including building knowledge, reducing stigma, increasing social connection and advocating for better support and services.

The work that communities take on to build stronger and more resilient communities that are caring, socially inclusive and non-discriminatory is long, changing and hard work. The short funding horizons of research projects, health and philanthropic grants are often at odds with the scale of the task. As a researcher, it is important to recognise and capture the good work done and the context in which people are working from, not just critically assess the things that have not happened or negative outcomes. This way you paint a fuller picture of what has happened so that participants feel seen and can recognise their efforts, take the criticism in a helpful light and keep going at the important work they do.