Welcome to The Need To Know Team Meeting #8 The Need To Know: collaborative research by MCHP, rural and northern RHAs, and Manitoba Health Director: Dr. P. Martens funded through CIHR ~ Community Alliances for Health Research Program

Figure 4: Timeline of activities LOI ProposalFundingMajor RHA needs assessmentFunding ends |______|______|______|______|______|______| Project 1 COMPLETE Project 2 UNDERWAY Project 3 STARTING DISCUSSIONS Set up laptop computers for each RHA local health researcher (CAHR funded) Support for interaction between local RHA researchers and academic researchers (CAHR funds 3 meetings per year in Winnipeg) for collaborative research and ongoing educational opportunities Develop web site (CAHR funded) Develop and test interactive web site content (CAHR funded) Opportunities for training and interaction with MCHP technical and academic support staff (CAHR supports 2 trips to each RHA per year by 2 MCHP personnel) Support for ongoing training and dissemination of knowledge products (CAHR funding supports 4 conferences for the MCHP directors, 2 conferences or workshops for each of the 11 RHA local health researchers, over the five years of funding) The clock is ticking

Conceptual model of the MCHP/RHA/MH collaboration: the “need to know” knowledge transfer model

Agenda for October 2003 October 6, 2003 –intro –discussion on items –N, S, MH meetings –Coffee –Mental Health report –lunch –poster/map sessions you will each make a poster for your RHA, and we will have it printed for you! –Coffee –RHA facilitation –DINNER (Vivere) 6 pm October 7, 2003 –Rural and Northern Health Care Day –LOTS have registered –You are the “main”facilitator this year, with backup of MCHP people Advisory Committee –3:15 pm

Some observations and discussions The ROOM! –disadvantages –advantages

Some observations and discussions The PEOPLE! –Dr. Charlyn Black presently director for the UBC Centre for Health Services and Policy Research stepped down as co-director of the NTK Team, but is still a co-investigator and a member of the Advisory Committee –Dr. Carolyn DeCoster away in Calgary to do a project on waiting lists will continue to be involved in MCHP

Some observations and discussions The PRODUCTS! –RHA Indicators deliverable debriefing stories about its use and impact what we learned for next time round! Comment from orientation: –mention involvement with the Team in your RHA when you use MCHP research … this gives context to the research findings, and highlights the Team effort –standing agenda item at meetings

Some observations and discussions The PUBLICATIONS! –some “goodies” for you … KT article from CIHR –Authorship issues

Some observations and discussions Some general guidelines on criteria for authorship may be helpful. Sources:  International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals. CMAJ 1995;152(9):  Policy 1401: Guidelines on responsibilities for research ethics, University of Manitoba, In general, authorship credit should be based on:  substantial contributions to either conception and design or else analysis and interpretation of data and involvement in drafting the paper or revising it critically for important intellectual content and  final approval of the version to be published. Any one accepting authorship accepts responsibility for the validity of the whole manuscript. All authors share responsibility for the publication and should have the opportunity to review all procedures and data used in preparing the publication. Participation solely in the collection or analysis of data does not justify authorship. Nor does general supervision of the research group. Group members who do not meet the criteria should be listed, with their permission, under Acknowledgements.

Some observations and discussions The VISION of the FUTURE! –CHSRF tool –travelling road show workshops? A working group to plan what this should be? Leave it up to the RHAs themselves? Maybe sponsor a special guest to do a “world tour”? –Possible CIHR grant???

Process of #3 deliverable …? Joy in the journey?

Recall Process of #2 deliverable … General discussion, input from various “experts” more RHA discussion by team members at next meeting, a ballot was taken each RHA, MH, MCHP got one vote decision arrived at to look at Mental Health ADMs and Deputy Minister MCHP …research team, working group of experts RHA/MH … each defined two questions February meeting, bulletin board re content MCHP … outline, ethics approvals, start analyses

The North, South, Manitoba Health groups:1/2 hour More input into process of #3 deliverable travelling road show - which form(s)? Any other issues arising from this presentation, or from elsewhere