Bridging the gap between communication research and practice: How we see our role

Bridging the gap between research and practice is a continuing challenge in many professional fields. Health communication is not exempt from this challenge. Despite the increasingly connected communication environment and media, research findings still do not always translate into effective practices, and vice versa. Lessons learned and best practices from field interventions do not consistently spur the types of research questions or studies that may address unmet needs of practitioners as well as help improve upon a specific type of communication intervention. At times, this lack of connection between research and practice extends to the most obvious (or “should-be-obvious”) form of research, program evaluation, and contributes to the paucity of interventions that are actually assessed vis-à-vis their outcome objectives and their overall impact on the health and social issues they seek to address. For example, other authors have highlighted that only an estimated one third of communication campaigns are actually evaluated vis-à-vis measurable objectives.¹

We know that there are many reasons for such a gap between research and practice. Researchers, practitioners, and pundits have debated many of these reasons in a variety of contexts. Communication lapses among researchers and practitioners are often cited among key factors contributing to the gap.^{2, 3} Unfortunately, too often “the discovery of knowledge implies no natural mechanisms for deploying it.”³ Therefore, the process of translating research into practice—or vice versa— encouraging research efforts that address key practice-related questions—requires mechanisms that (a) facilitate not only collaborations and partnerships across sectors to disseminate knowledge, provide mentorship and encourage practical applications,³ but also (b) support a constant exchange of information, opinions, and ideas, resulting in research efforts and theoretical frameworks that are informed by practitioners' and community needs and lessons from the field. How can academia become more engaged with practice and community settings? How can practice and communities, the ultimate beneficiaries of health communication interventions, become more engaged with research and academic settings? These are questions that continue to challenge us as we experiment with solutions and strive to implement them in a scalable and consistent way, both in developed and developing nations. Ultimately, such mechanisms may improve the chance that both knowledge and its practical applications would benefit the public, and help improve population and patient outcomes. So, we have no choice other than continuing to embrace this challenge.

Another key issue is about the clarity (or lack of) of scientific writing. For example, the ability to influence health policy is strictly related to how well we can support our arguments with research findings and data that are expressed in plain language. Policy communication and public advocacy are well-established health communication areas^{4, 5} that have contributed to relevant outcomes in different areas such as immunization, HIV/AIDS, cancer research, and many other health and social issues. Yet, too often policymakers and researchers may use completely different languages to discuss the same health or social issue, or rely on jargon that is not easily understood by the other group, or regard policy making in completely different ways.⁶ For example, policymakers may perceive “statecraft as an art” while scholars may consider it a science⁶. Obviously, these perspectives need to continue to merge in order to lead to effective and evidence-based policymaking within and outside the health field.

Other factors influence the existing gap between research and practice. These include the lack of proper capacity and professional training in either research or program design, implementation, and evaluation within complementary professional sectors; limited resources; conflicting priorities; the complexity of health and social issues and related research questions and interventions; lack of awareness and limited use of dissemination strategies and tools; and non-supportive organizational or policy environments.^2-4 Within this context what is the role of a peer-reviewed publication such as the Journal of Communication in Healthcare: Strategies, Media, and Engagement in Global Health, that proudly engages with both academicians and practitioners, in encouraging increasing connections between communication research and practice? There are several areas on which peer-reviewed publications can help make a difference. These include (but are not limited to):

•	Insisting on the clarity of the writing for all kinds of peer-reviewed articles and Journal's sections, so that research findings, lessons from the field, and opinions may reach a broader audience. This entails focusing on precision and conciseness, providing definitions of all key concepts in plain language, and overall, “eliminating redundancy, wordiness, jargon, evasiveness, overuse of the passive voice, and clumsy prose7”
•	Creating a climate that would encourage both authors and reviewers to make sure that most research findings clearly discuss implications for practice, and conversely, that the discussion of lessons from the field and outcome results from case studies also point to research questions and unmet needs that should be further investigated to improve upon specific communication interventions or existing theories and planning frameworks.
•	Providing a forum for the discussion of relevant topics, trends, and issues that are on the mind of researchers and/or practitioners. Our newly introduced occasional section Letters: Viewpoints on Current Issues, which features letters-to-editors and op-ed pieces, is an attempt to take the pulse of different issues and opinions within both the research and practice settings, ultimately contributing to facilitate a vibrant dialogue among different health communication stakeholders and other professionals. We will also continue to reach out to professionals from multiple sectors for interviews on topics within the Journal's recently expanded scope (see for example, this issue's interview with Thomas Abraham from The University of Hong Kong on lessons learned from global polio eradication communication), so that we can further broaden the range of topics covered by the Journal, and meet the need of a wider audience of researchers and practitioners.

While we know that the above points are just a start, we will continue to strive for solutions and actively participate in the ongoing debate on how to bridge the existing gap between communication research and practice. In the meantime, we hope you enjoy the articles in this issue that include implications for both research and practice in very different fields such as, for example, the potential of digital and mobile tools in implementing Healthy People 2020 (the United States public health agenda for one decade) and reaching the lives of all Americans; message strategies to increase consumer motivation for protection from high risk food as the result of different ways of framing food recall messages and related theoretical frameworks; provider-patient communication approaches for physicians who interact with a crying adult patient during routine visits; and other topics as they apply to specific health areas and/or patient groups.

Finally, I am pleased to remind you of the 2014 forthcoming issues and topics, so that our authors can plan their submissions for the rest of the year. This year we have planned on two special issues that address health communication topics of great relevance at this moment in time, where we hope to feature relevant findings and perspectives from both research and practice settings. This information is also included on the Journal's new website, which was launched in December 2013 and I invite you to visit at http://www.maneyonline.com/cih

•	March 2014 - All topics
•	July 2014 - Health Communication in Health Disparities Settings
•	October 2014 - All topics
•	December 2014 - Risk Communication in Epidemics and Emerging Disease Settings

Happy 2014! I hope you all had a good start to the new year, and will continue to stay engaged with the Journal of Communication in Healthcare: Strategies, Media, and Engagement in Global Health in the upcoming months.