Internet Explorer is no longer supported by Microsoft. To browse the NIHR site please use a modern, secure browser like Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox, or Microsoft Edge.

National Institute for Health and Care Research logo | Homepage

How to disseminate your research

dissemination plan in research example

Published: 01 January 2019

Version: Version 1.0 - January 2019

This guide is for researchers who are applying for funding or have research in progress. It is designed to help you to plan your dissemination and give your research every chance of being utilised.

What does NIHR mean by dissemination?

Effective dissemination is simply about getting the findings of your research to the people who can make use of them, to maximise the benefit of the research without delay.

Research is of no use unless it gets to the people who need to use it

Professor Chris Whitty, Chief Scientific Adviser for the Department of Health

Principles of good dissemination

Stakeholder engagement: Work out who your primary audience is; engage with them early and keep in touch throughout the project, ideally involving them from the planning of the study to the dissemination of findings. This should create ‘pull’ for your research i.e. a waiting audience for your outputs. You may also have secondary audiences and others who emerge during the study, to consider and engage.

Format: Produce targeted outputs that are in an appropriate format for the user. Consider a range of tailored outputs for decision makers, patients, researchers, clinicians, and the public at national, regional, and/or local levels as appropriate. Use plain English which is accessible to all audiences.

Utilise opportunities: Build partnerships with established networks; use existing conferences and events to exchange knowledge and raise awareness of your work.

Context: Understand the service context of your research, and get influential opinion leaders on board to act as champions. Timing: Dissemination should not be limited to the end of a study. Consider whether any findings can be shared earlier

Remember to contact your funding programme for guidance on reporting outputs .

Your dissemination plan: things to consider

What do you want to achieve, for example, raise awareness and understanding, or change practice? How will you know if you are successful and made an impact? Be realistic and pragmatic. 

Identify your audience(s) so that you know who you will need to influence to maximise the uptake of your research e.g. commissioners, patients, clinicians and charities. Think who might benefit from using your findings. Understand how and where your audience looks for/receives information. Gain an insight into what motivates your audience and the barriers they may face.

Remember to feedback study findings to participants, such as patients and clinicians; they may wish to also participate in the dissemination of the research and can provide a powerful voice.

When will dissemination activity occur? Identify and plan critical time points, consider external influences, and utilise existing opportunities, such as upcoming conferences. Build momentum throughout the entire project life-cycle; for example, consider timings for sharing findings.

Think about the expertise you have in your team and whether you need additional help with dissemination. Consider whether your dissemination plan would benefit from liaising with others, for example, NIHR Communications team, your institution’s press office, PPI members. What funds will you need to deliver your planned dissemination activity? Include this in your application (or talk to your funding programme).

Partners / Influencers: think about who you will engage with to amplify your message. Involve stakeholders in research planning from an early stage to ensure that the evidence produced is grounded, relevant, accessible and useful.

Messaging: consider the main message of your research findings. How can you frame this so it will resonate with your target audience? Use the right language and focus on the possible impact of your research on their practice or daily life.

Channels: use the most effective ways to communicate your message to your target audience(s) e.g. social media, websites, conferences, traditional media, journals. Identify and connect with influencers in your audience who can champion your findings.

Coverage and frequency: how many people are you trying to reach? How often do you want to communicate with them to achieve the required impact?

Potential risks and sensitivities: be aware of the relevant current cultural and political climate. Consider how your dissemination might be perceived by different groups.

Think about what the risks are to your dissemination plan e.g. intellectual property issues. Contact your funding programme for advice.

More advice on dissemination

We want to ensure that the research we fund has the maximum benefit for patients, the public and the NHS. Generating meaningful research impact requires engaging with the right people from the very beginning of planning your research idea.

More advice from the NIHR on knowledge mobilisation and dissemination .

  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to header right navigation
  • Skip to site footer

Freelance Research Communications Consultant for Science and Technology | Dan Richards-Doran

Science copywriting, strategic communications and executive coaching for universities, research organisations, and industry.

dissemination plan in research example

Develop your research dissemination plan in seven simple steps

' src=

Plan early, cost appropriately, communicate regularly

For many scientists and innovators, getting together a research dissemination and engagement plan is a crucial part of any grant application or research project. For those writing their grant application, this section of a grant application can often be seen as a box-ticking exercise. In many cases, the usual 4Ps will dominate by default – posters, presentations, publications and press releases.

Often, it’s not until later on in the research project that the need arises for a slightly more nuanced approach to communicating the project and it’s findings. And don’t forget shiny things like videos, infographics, podcasts and public engagement training.

dissemination plan in research example

What is a research dissemination plan?

A research dissemination plan will help you to get the findings and outputs of your research to the citizens, professionals or policymakers who will use the information in their daily lives, to guide professional practice, or to inform policymaking.

Developing a research dissemination plan early on will support you to maximise the value and impact of your research.

Fund your dissemination activities through research income

Communicating research can be a costly endeavour. Cash-strapped University departments don’t tend to have core funds squirrelled away for outreach or research communications. Administrators may tell you that your research budget will need to take a hit, or the activity unfortunately can’t go ahead (and I’m writing from bitter experience here!).

Some researchers choose to go it alone when it comes to dissemination, while others will invest their funds wisely in specialist strategic communications support, so their outputs are delivered professionally.

Engage stakeholders throughout the project

For research with the potential to influence policy or practice, funding panels can look at whether there is scope for the project to engage with particular audiences (like policymakers, lay publics, professionals or other communities of practice) and how the project’s research dissemination plan could support that.

Investing time during the grant application stage to brainstorm a full research dissemination and engagement plan can mean that everything you really want and need to do is:

  • sufficiently resourced and costed,
  • planned ahead and achievable,
  • and most importantly – designed to support the overall goals of the research project.

Additionally, looking for opportunities to carry out dissemination and engagement throughout the research project, rather than at the end, can provide ongoing opportunities for dialogue and feedback. This can yield rich insights about the implications of your research findings on key community groups, potentially informing how they are framed when it comes to the publication stage and the all-important press release.

Consider internal as well as external stakeholders in your plan, and look for opportunities to discuss your ongoing work with others in your department or outside of your faculty.

Seven simple steps to develop your research dissemination plan

Every research dissemination plan is specific to the project, its goals and audiences. It needs to be needs based, so don’t lead with the shiny things and plan around them – press releases, podcasts, infographics etc. Adopting a framework approach, based on the seven steps below, can help to structure discussions about what to include:

1. Objectives: What do you want to achieve?

Set out the purpose of your dissemination efforts as a series of goals or objectives. Consider whether you are trying to simply share knowledge, shift an attitude, change a behaviour, or create a community/network to engage with.

2. Audience: Who do you want to reach?

Brainstorm everyone you need to reach and engage with. This may include your head of department, research funder, policymakers and end users. Prioritise your audiences, identifying those who are key to achieving your goals. Also include anyone you may need to work with or through to reach your key target audience.

3. Situation: What is the broader context for your research?

Consider the broader context for your research, for example, what do your key audiences already think, feel and do about your topic area? Are there any social or political issues at play? This may require some research but it will help to ground your activities in reality and ensure your messaging is relevant.

4. Messaging: What will you say?

Formulate key messages that align with your objectives and communicate your research in an accessible and engaging manner. Ground your messaging in real-world relevance – what does your research mean to people? You might find you have different messages for different audiences.

5. Your overall strategy

Good strategies align directly with goals and audiences. They describe your overall approach. Let’s say you’re looking to share knowledge with a mass audience, then you might decide to opt for an approach that centres around media relations. On the other hand, if you’re looking to shift attitudes or inform policy or decision making, then invest time discussing your work with a niche audience.

6. Tactics: How will you deliver your strategy?

This action plan includes the nuts and bolts of your dissemination plan. Activities will be linked to your research project milestones with details of who will deliver what, when and how much it will cost. Crucially, getting an idea of costs at this stage means you can add this detail into your grant application so your activities are appropriately costed. And bingo, affordable!

7. Evaluate: How will you measure success?

Outline how you will measure success against each objective. Consider both the outputs of your dissemination efforts (such as a press release achieving coverage in a target publication) and the outcomes (such as a follow-up conversation with a key stakeholder about a new research collaboration). Review these throughout your research project, if something isn’t working then adapt your plan. It should be a living and flexible guide.

Planning early gives you the best possible chance of getting your wish list funded, and gives your team a roadmap for communicating and engaging with stakeholders throughout your project.

dissemination plan in research example

Get professional research communications support:

As an experienced research communications consultant and a registered expert in science dissemination to the European Parliament, Dan Richards-Doran delivers communications strategies, training and copywriting for researchers:

  • Press releases
  • Impact case studies
  • Lay summaries
  • Policy briefings
  • Stakeholder newsletters
  • Research dissemination strategies

Share this:

A LinkedIn on a mobile.

Discover more from Freelance Research Communications Consultant for Science and Technology | Dan Richards-Doran

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Type your email…

Continue reading

U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

  • Publications
  • Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

  • Advanced Search
  • Journal List
  • HHS Author Manuscripts

Logo of nihpa

Not the last word: dissemination strategies for patient-centred research in nursing

Teresa l. hagan.

1 Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit Street, Yawkey 10B, Boston, MA 02114

Karen Schmidt

2 University of Pittsburgh Clinical & Translational Science Institute

Guyanna R. Ackison

3 University of Pittsburgh School of Nursing, 415 Victoria Building, 3500 Victoria Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15261

Megan Murphy

4 National Ovarian Cancer Coalition, 6507 Wilkins Avenue, Suite 100, Pittsburgh, PA 15217

Jennifer R. Jones

5 Community PARTners Core, University of Pittsburgh Clinical & Translational Science Institute, 4200 Forbes Avenue, Forbes Tower Suite 7057, Pittsburgh, PA 15260


Research results hold value for many stakeholders including researchers, patient populations, advocacy organizations, and community groups. The aim of this study is to describe our research team’s systematic process to designing a dissemination strategy for a completed research study.


We organized a dissemination event to feed the results of our study to participants and stakeholders and collect feedback regarding our study. We applied the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality’s dissemination framework to guide the development of the event and collected participant feedback during the event.

We describe our dissemination strategy along with attendees’ feedback and suggestions for our research as an example of a way to design a patient- and community-focused dissemination. We explain the details of our dissemination strategy including (a) our process of reporting a large research study into a stakeholder event, (b) stakeholder feedback collected at the event, and (c) the translation of feedback into our research team’s research. We also describe challenges encountered during the dissemination process and ways to handle issues such as logistics, funding, and staff.


This analysis provides key insights and practical advice for researchers looking for innovative ways to disseminate their findings within the lay and scientific communities.


The research dissemination process is a crucial aspect of any study, especially research that directly involves the community. ( Chen et al., 2010 ) The knowledge produced through systematic investigations (a) informs the development of knowledge within the scientific field; (b) ensures that the study’s methods, analysis, and conclusions are open to scientific and public scrutiny; and (c) guarantees that those with a vested interest in the research understand and find benefit from the study’s findings. The Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) Statement sets guidelines for ethical ways of disseminating research, stating that dissemination “honors the altruistic motivations of patient-subjects,” that participants are “entitled to know the results of the research their enrollment made possible,” and that dissemination is “consistent with the duty to share new knowledge.” ( Mann, 2005 ) While peer-reviewed journals, professional conferences, and professional communities remain excellent mechanisms by which to deliver results to the scientific community, researchers should capitalize on the opportunity to bolster their professional objectives by distributing research results widely to all stakeholders. ( Chambers and Azrin, 2013 )

As nurse researchers, we must acknowledge the value of our research across multiple audiences. ( Timmons, 2015 ) We must strive to appreciate the potential impacts of our research for study participants, patient populations, community organizations, and policy organizations alike. Our scientific research may be valuable in ways not originally intended by our scientific question, and the dissemination process and planning of future research is an ideal time in which to engage these stakeholders. ( Anderson et al., 2014 )

Our research team recently experienced such a crossroads at the end of a national, cross-sectional study among adult females with a history of cancer. Our parent study aimed to develop a measure of patient self-advocacy to assess their ability to get their needs met in the face of challenge. We believe that this concept is crucial in the current climate of ongoing health inequities ( Adler et al., 2016 ; Lyratzopoulos et al., 2013 ), increasingly complex medical care ( Collins et al., 2009 ; Reyna et al., 2015 ), and vested interests in promoting patient engagement in their health care decisions ( Frank et al., 2015 ). We decided to disseminate the results of our study not only to our participants, but to wider community audiences who had vested interests in discussing our results and imaging potential future steps. In this way, we could both share our results and build community with like-minded individuals and community partners interested in addressing the need for patient self-advocacy.

The purpose of our one-time dissemination strategy and activities was to inform, empower, and engage a multitude of groups interested in improving the health of women with cancer. This analysis is meant to give practical and translational guidance to researchers who are interested in disseminating their research in novel ways, and to stakeholders who are interested in partnering with researchers in the scientific process.


Parent study.

We sought to disseminate our mixed-mode, cross-sectional survey study testing the psychometric properties of a new measure of self-advocacy among female cancer survivors. ( Authors A ; Authors B ) This Self-Advocacy Study took three and a half years to complete and was based on qualitative pilot work describing how patients define and enact self-advocacy. ( Authors C ) We recruited women locally from the western Pennsylvania area as well as nationally through cancer-related advocacy groups to complete a battery of paper or online questionnaires about their health history, cancer- and treatment-related symptoms, beliefs about their health, and personality traits. Inclusion criteria for this parent study included being female, having a previous diagnosis of an invasive type of cancer, and being able to read and write in English. Participants ( N =347) were recruited nationally and locally from two patient research and tumor registries, cancer clinics, and seven advocacy organizations. This study received human subjects approval from the University of Pittsburgh Institutional Review Board.

While we did not design this study using community-based participatory research principles, we collected input from women with cancer, advocacy organizations, and other stakeholders at all stages of the Self-Advocacy Study. We wanted to know stakeholders’ preferences and attitudes about patient self-advocacy, the design and implementation of the study, and potential uses of a self-advocacy scale we were developing. We met with leaders from the patient registries, cancer clinics, and advocacy organizations to discuss the study and potential collaborations before, during, and after the study ended. As a measure of trust-building and collaboration, we promised each of our recruitment sites that we would share the results of the study with them and their membership at the end of the study. Most organizations requested receiving the results of the study for education of their stakeholders and organization.

Dissemination Event

As we completed the Self-Advocacy Study, our research team began to consider possible strategies to efficiently and fruitfully disseminate our results to multiple groups of lay and scientific stakeholders. Despite our study being a one-time survey study, we grew close to our participants during the course of the study as we heard their stories of advocating for their healthcare and personal needs. Even though we conducted qualitative pilot work exploring patient experiences of self-advocacy, we recognized that this study was exposing patients’ additional concerns. We concluded that patients and our stakeholders required a larger forum in which to discuss patient self-advocacy. We wanted to provide space to discuss the challenges to having patients speak up for their values and preferences and brainstorm ways to build self-advocacy skills in vulnerable patient populations.

Our main dissemination event consisted of a large one-day dissemination meeting and discussion in August 2015. We invited participants from the parent study, individuals from our recruitment sites, and community members who would be interested in promoting patient self-advocacy. At this event, we presented our findings of our research study, encouraged stakeholders to discuss the findings with each other, and together developed strategies for future research studies. We did not intend for this event to be a formal research study, but did want to capitalize on the opportunity to receive feedback from multiple stakeholders and collectively discuss future steps for our research team’s long-term program of research.

Thirty-two individuals attended the dissemination event. Since our invitations were sent to multiple stakeholders and large memberships, we are unsure of how many individuals received the invitation. Table 2 describes the event’s attendees based on feedback from thirteen people who completed the evaluation form. Each attendee was given a folder with a program of the dissemination event, a brief summary of the completed Self-Advocacy Study, a copy of the small group discussion questions that would be asked during the dissemination event, and paper to take notes. Volunteers from the University of Pittsburgh School of Nursing were located in the back of the event room offering health information, blood pressure screenings, health promotion materials, and community health resources. The event was also web-cast for attendees who were not from Pittsburgh or who were unable to attend the event in-person.

Dissemination Event Attendees (n=13)

The event lasted an hour and a half and consisted of lunch, a brief presentation describing the Self-Advocacy Study’s purpose and results, and a testimonial from a woman with ovarian cancer describing her experience of self-advocacy. This testimony was intended to provide a real-life description of the clinical problem and reinforce the need for research to improve self-advocacy among women with cancer.

While describing the study, we shared a brief overview of the final self-advocacy scale and its items. Rather than discuss the validity and reliability statistics supporting the psychometric strength of the instrument, we discussed the meaning of the scale (what each sub-dimension meant and how the scale could be used). We focused on data that was relevant to our audience to provide context and results of the study to our audience. We encouraged questions from the audience and received many thoughtful comments throughout the presentation.

Next, attendees broke out into small groups to discuss the Self-Advocacy Study’s findings and future study directions. They were instructed that their feedback would be used by the research team in their making of patient education and future research studies. Therefore, attendees were encouraged to talk openly and freely, and that all perspectives were equally valuable. We wrote the questions below to elicit feedback on study results and brainstorm future research and patient support:

  • From what the study found out about self-advocacy, do you think the researchers are missing any critical parts of how patients advocate for themselves?
  • From what the study found out about self-advocacy, what do you think is the best way to help teach women how to advocate for themselves?
  • How would you specifically try to do this?

After the small group discussions, the entire group reconvened to share findings and discuss future research priorities. Research team members facilitated the conversation within each small group, took notes to document the discussion, and kept a log of suggestions. The same research team members recorded notes from the large group discussion.

Dissemination Framework

We searched for dissemination frameworks that would provide us with a structured method for disseminating research into the community and collecting feedback from stakeholders. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) created the Dissemination Planning Tool ( Figure 1 ) in an effort to support researchers in effectively disseminating their research. We selected this framework because its first step reflected our research study’s status (e.g., research findings) and the framework’s specific, targeted steps for creating a robust dissemination plan including identifying and defining: (a) research findings and products, (b) end-users, (c) dissemination partners, (d) communication, (e) evaluation, and (f) dissemination work plan. (Carpenter et al., 2013) This framework is intended to serve as a tool for researchers to market the unique aspects of their research to those multiple end-users.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is nihms909348f1.jpg

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality’s Dissemination Planning Tool

In this article, we describe our application of the AHRQ framework to the Self-Advocacy Study’s dissemination plan. Using the steps of the framework, we will expound on our planning and implementation of the dissemination event, and then describe the results of this event especially as they pertain to involving patients and community stakeholders in our research program.

We describe our results of our dissemination strategy as they relate to the AHRQ Dissemination Framework.

(A) Research Findings & Products

We designed our dissemination strategy to involve our partners in our dissemination process by presenting them with the results of our Self-Advocacy Study at our dissemination event and asking for their advice during this event. We purposefully chose not to make assumptions about how stakeholders would interpret our research findings. Rather, we specifically wanted their guidance on how the study results should be used to both inform future studies and develop patient education teaching self-advocacy skills to individuals with cancer.

Developing research products for dissemination required a shift in viewpoint among the research team. The scientific findings of our study were related to the psychometric properties of our new self-advocacy scale, and we are currently reporting these results in scientific journals and at scientific conferences. Study participants and recruitment sites were aware of these aims of the study, but we presumed these groups and other non-scientific stakeholders would likely not be interested in our scale’s psychometric results. Therefore, we altered our dissemination focus and rethought our findings from the perspective of these stakeholders to present our most interesting and useful results for discussion at the dissemination event.

(B) End-users

Given our commitment to share our results, we were obliged to share our results with our study participants and recruitment sites. All participants were invited to attend the dissemination event either in-person or virtually. Since the Self-Advocacy Study was a national study, we knew that participants outside of the Pittsburgh area would not be able to attend the event, but would be interested in the study’s findings. We met with leaders of each of our recruitment sites to discuss the study findings, answer questions from the site leaders, and discuss potential partnerships during future research studies. We were also interested in sharing our results with the broader patient population and local and national community stakeholders. The scientific community was also an end-user, and a group to whom we wanted to report the rigor by which we undertook the study and the significance of the study results. Table 1 describes each of our end-users, their levels of participation in the parent study, and their interests in the results of the study.

Dissemination Methods and Results by End-user

(C) Dissemination Partners

Given our diverse end-users, we decided to streamline dissemination process by having at least one event in August 2015 that we could invite study participants, recruitment site leaders, and all interested stakeholders to attend. The University of Pittsburgh Clinical and Translational Science Institute (CTSI) was a major contributor, both as one of our most successful recruitment partner through their Research Participant Registry and as a source of funding for our dissemination process.

(D) Communication

Since we had such broad end-users, we wanted the communication of our dissemination strategy to appeal to multiple groups. We communicated our dissemination event using paper and email brochures and included a description of the event emphasizing that most of the discussing the study results. We also included a brief, two-page bulletin describing the study and highlighting our results. To encourage others who may be interested in the study and topic to attend, we asked all of our partners to share the invitation to their respective networks. Because our research study was national but our event was held locally, we invited interested parties to attend the dissemination event using video-conference and/or to privately share their thoughts about the study and ideas about potential next steps with the research team.

(E) Evaluation

Immediately after the dissemination event, we asked attendees to complete an evaluation and offer additional suggestions to our research team. These forms were primarily a programmatic evaluation of the event and additional opportunity for feedback; we did not originally intend to design these forms as qualitative questionnaires for research purposes. We also received feedback from other patients and stakeholders who were not able to attend the event, but who had received our bulletins and presentation slides.

(F) Dissemination Work Plan

Based on the evaluation feedback we received at the dissemination event, our research team developed a work plan after highlighting ways in which we could integrate the results of the research study with the results from the dissemination event to inform our next steps in this program of research regarding patient self-advocacy. The plan consisted of (1) creating patient education materials to train patients to self-advocate and (2) designing a patient-centered intervention to train patients to self-advocate.

Table 1 describes the products and modes of dissemination for each end-user along with the research team’s special considerations for each. This table demonstrates how the same products can be shared across end-users.

Results of the dissemination evaluation were overall positive, with the lowest scores reflecting attendees’ perceptions of meaningfully contributing to the study ( Table 3 ). Attendees generally enjoyed the event, felt they learned about the study and could ask questions, and wanted to stay involved in the research going forward. While attendees who had not participated in the Self-Advocacy Study did not feel as strongly that they contributed to the study in a meaningful way, study participants did feel like they contributed meaningfully.

Evaluations from Dissemination Event

We transcribed the notes taken during the small and large group discussions and then organized the notes into a single document which the research team can now reference. Table 4 includes direct quotations of attendee suggestions on how the research team should disseminate study findings. Such rich, descriptive insights recorded in the small and large group discussions could not have been abstracted from the results of the Self-Advocacy Study. Moreover, attendees noted learning from each other’s experiences and perspectives. Some attendees networked with each other to share resources and information related to their cancer and treatment.

Advice from Participants on How to Support Self-Advocacy Among Women with Cancer

Development of Patient Education Materials & Planning for Future Research Studies

The feedback we received during the dissemination event provided keen, direct guidance suggesting we develop patient education materials to help patients self-advocate. For example, attendees were adamant about the role of social support in being foundational to women being able to advocate for themselves. Therefore, our patient education (and research interventions) must address how a woman can affectively use her available support systems. One attendee who was a study participant gave an exemplary metaphor when she described the interplay between self-advocacy and social support: “It’s like Uber – you are in charge of where you are going, but you don’t always have to drive.” This metaphor is invaluable for our research team as we move our research into designing interventions. Based on what these stakeholders suggested for our self-advocacy patient education, we developed a website ( ) that will engage individuals with cancer in sharing their stories of self-advocacy, hints for others who are struggling to self-advocate, and our results from previous studies regarding patient self-advocacy. We will continue to use this website to provide a space for individuals affected by cancer looking for connection and strength together.

Feedback from the dissemination event provided us with critical perspectives for our future research. Specific recommendations included the ideal timing and location of future interventions and specific types of information that would be appealing to women who struggle to self-advocate. One attendee urged us to design research with clear, explicit instructions: “What you [the researchers] need is a primer for self-advocacy with real world examples.” Attendees also recommended having self-advocacy interventions include their healthcare providers and community resources outside of the hospital system. One woman described the difficulties of self-advocating with a rare cancer, and ended up informing other attendees about her type of cancer and the lack of available resources. Based on this feedback, we are currently designing and pilot testing a self-advocacy training intervention that uses common situations patients in our previous discussions have described to demonstrate how and when they can advocate for their needs and priorities.

Our study team learned several key lessons relevant to anyone attempting to organize a patient- and community-centered research dissemination event.

Practical Concerns

Key challenges and lessons learned during our dissemination included:

  • Attendee considerations . In order to have as many attendees as possible, we tried to preemptively accommodate the needs of our audience to allow them to attend the dissemination event. We ensured the event’s location was centrally located next to the major woman’s hospital but not in the hospital to accommodate community stakeholders, researchers, and participants alike. The room was fully accessible and disability-friendly, restrooms were close by, and that the time of day was around the lunch hour. Still, several people noted that physical limitations or health illnesses prevented them from attending. We had eleven study participants cancel in the days immediately before the event due to health concerns.
  • Remote attendance technology concerns . We originally had over 20 study participants indicate they would virtually attend the dissemination event. We sent them log-in information, reminder emails, copies of the presentation slides and an email address to contact in case of technological difficulties. Despite the strong interest, no one virtually attended the meeting.
  • Ethical concerns . While conducting the Self-Advocacy Study, our study team was vigilant about protecting participants’ privacy and confidentiality. While organizing our dissemination event, we considered the ethics of having patients attend the event and having a speaker discuss her personal experiences in front of the group. We specifically gave patients the option to remain anonymous while at the event, since not all attendees were patients with cancer, and encouraged people to only share to their level of comfort. We invited a member of the National Ovarian Cancer Coalition speakers’ bureau who speaks publically about her cancer experience in the Pittsburgh community provide the testimonial during the event and worked with her prior to the event to ensure her comfort in sharing her story with the diverse group of attendees.

Facilitators of our dissemination plan included:

  • Key academic partners . Having the CTSI support to assist in dissemination free of charge was instrumental in conducting the dissemination. The CTSI’s funding was also necessary to afford the costs associated with the dissemination event.
  • Key community stakeholders . Community stakeholders such as National Ovarian Cancer Coalition facilitated the event by organizing the catering and booking the event space. Familiar with the needs of this patient population, they proactively ensured the dissemination event space was handicap-accessible and close to the parking garage to reduce attendee burden.
  • Research study team. Member of the Self-Advocacy Study research team were critical to setting up the dissemination event, greeting attendees, leading and recording the small group discussions, managing the webcast of the event, and ensuring the overall success of the event. These volunteers made the event run in an efficient, productive, and personable manner.
  • Food . Providing lunch from a quality restaurant at the dissemination event encouraged attendance and demonstrated our research team’s appreciation of the attendees’ time, energy, and valuable feedback.
  • Parking . Because of the relationship National Ovarian Cancer Coalition had with the event location and our funding, we were able to provide free parking to the event.

This simple, one-time dissemination strategy represents an alternative to only disseminating research for the scientific community. For non-researchers, involvement in dissemination strategy like the one described in this article provide a feedback mechanism by which to understand and critique research intended to benefit end-users like themselves. For researchers, having patients and stakeholders interested and involved in your research offers several tangible benefits in addition to ensuring that our end-users have received the results of our research.

Research participants want and expect trustworthy, timely information about the studies to which they consent to participate. ( Ondenge et al., 2015 ) As a cross-sectional survey study, the Self-Advocacy Study offered a limited, inflexible platform for sharing ideas and concerns. Therefore, our participants and stakeholders appreciated the outlet that the dissemination event provided to raise concerns or offer suggestions about how to improve the lives of women with cancer. We received positive feedback from attendees indicating their appreciation for being included in the research endeavor and enjoyment of the event. We recommend other research groups use the AHRQ Dissemination Planning Tool to methodically consider their dissemination process and how this process can be used to spur inventive, patient- and community-stakeholder centered projects. If robustly designed, such dissemination events can succeed at both improving patient engagement and making research more relevant to all stakeholders. ( Domecq et al., 2014 )

Innovative partnerships between academia and community stakeholders have demonstrated the creative potential of having multiple perspectives and talents brought together. ( Roy et al, 2014 ) Viewing research as a sustained program rather than punctuated episodes, such partners can provide tangible resources (e.g. space, staff, volunteers, and connections) and dedicated attentiveness (e.g. future collaborations) unmatched within the constraints of academia. Our partners during the Self-Advocacy Study assisted in organizing this dissemination event and actively discussed future research priorities. We will continue to nurture these partnerships for the purpose of collectively working to benefit this patient population.

Above all, dissemination processes can build trust between researchers, patients, and community stakeholders. In an era with growing public scrutiny of the research process, ( Gauchat, 2012 ) such partnerships are critical. By ensuring all parties understand the others’ priorities and activities, a more unified effort can be orchestrated to address critical health care problems. ( Gradinger et al., 2013 ) This may lead to sustainable academic-community partnerships that can facilitate a healthy, ongoing collaboration of developing shared research questions, scientific investigations, and result dissemination. ( Carney et al., 2011 ) Even though our dissemination event was limited in time and space, it convened a group of stakeholders together to succinctly and efficiently provide study results and request stakeholder input.

Limitations to this study include the low participant turn-out rate among research participants and the low response rate for evaluation forms among attendees of the dissemination event. While we spent considerable time working with study participants and recruitment sites advertising the event and addressing possible obstacles to attendance (e.g., having the event webcast, offering lunch, validating parking, etc.), we were limited by the availability of study participants (recruited from around the country) to hold the event at a time and location that may not have been convenient for all individuals especially those who had ongoing health issues. Finding creative ways to involve individuals with health limitations and limited travel abilities will ensure all stakeholders are able to contribute during these dissemination events. Moreover, our research assistants attempted to collect evaluation forms from each attendee, but many attendees left the event prior to the research assistant being able to remind attendees to complete the form. In future studies, we would suggest holding multiple events at times and locations that are not cumbersome to the patient population being served. We would also conduct a formal pre-post study to evaluate specific aspects of the dissemination event that impacted stakeholders.

Publication of research findings within scientific journals is adequate but not innovative. Finding novel ways to share findings can serve the interests of researchers, academics and participants. While we do not believe that our dissemination of the Self-Advocacy Study was overly elaborate, the method by which we approached and conducted our dissemination can be used by other researchers and community stakeholders interested in making mutually beneficial research partnerships.

  • Dissemination of study results can mutually benefit the patient- and community-stakeholders as well as investigators of research studies.
  • Applying frameworks of research dissemination can assist researchers in developing a strategic, community-based approach to sharing study results and generating imaginative, patient-focused approaches to advancing scientific discovery.
  • Building collaborations with community stakeholders through honest, open dissemination of study results and discussions of future research steps establishes trust between the lay and scientific communities.
  • Creative means of sharing and building research programs can stimulate novel forms of patient education, approaches to intervention research, and forms of stakeholder involvement in research.


NIH/NINR F31NR014066 (Hagan)

University of Pittsburgh Clinical and Translational Science Institute UL1TR000005 (Hagan)

Conflict of Interest :

Dr. Hagan, Dr. Schmidt, Ms. Ackison, Ms. Murphy, and Ms. Jones declare that they have no conflict of interest.

  • Authors A (blinded for peer review)
  • Authors B (blinded for peer review)
  • Authors C (blinded for peer review)
  • Adler NE, Glymour MM, Fielding J. Addressing social determinants of health and health inequalities. JAMA. 2016; 316 (16):1641–1642. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Anderson NLR, Lesser J, ángel Oscós-Sánchez M, Piñeda, et al. Approaches to community nursing research partnerships: a case example. Journal of Transcultural Nursing. 2014; 25 (2):129–136. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Carney JK, Maltby HJ, Mackin KA, Maksym ME. Community–academic partnerships: how can communities benefit? American Journal of Preventive Medicine. 2011; 41 (4):S206–213. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Carpenter D, Nieva V, Albaghal T, et al. Advances in Patient Safety: From Research to Implementation, Programs, Tools and Practices. Vol. 4. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2005. Development of a planning tool to guide dissemination of research results. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Chambers DA, Azrin ST. Research and services partnerships: partnership: a fundamental component of dissemination and implementation research. Psychiatric Services. 2013; 64 (4):509–511. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Chen PG, Diaz N, Lucas G, et al. Dissemination of results in community-based participatory research. American Journal of Preventive Medicine. 2010; 39 (4):372–378. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Collins ED, Moore CP, Clay KF, et al. Can women with early-stage breast cancer make an informed decision for mastectomy? Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2009; 27 (4):519–525. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Domecq JP, Prutsky G, Elraiyah T, et al. Patient engagement in research: a systematic review. BMC Health Services Research. 2014; 14 (1):1151–1166. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Frank L, Forsythe L, Ellis L, et al. Conceptual and practical foundations of patient engagement in research at the patient-centered outcomes research institute. Quality of Life Research. 2015; 24 (5):1033–1041. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Gauchat G. Politicization of science in the public sphere a study of public trust in the United States, 1974 to 2010. American Sociological Review. 2012; 77 (2):167–187. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Gradinger F, Britten N, Wyatt K, et al. Values associated with public involvement in health and social care research: a narrative review. Health Expectations. 2013; 18 (5):661–675. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Lyratzopoulos G, Abel GA, Brown CH, et al. Socio-demographic inequalities in stage of cancer diagnosis: evidence from patients with female breast, lung, colon, rectal, prostate, renal, bladder, melanoma, ovarian and endometrial cancer. Annals of Oncology. 2013; 24 (3):843–850. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Mann H. ASSERT: a standard for the scientific and ethical review of trials. 2005 [Internet] Available at:
  • Ondenge K, McLellan-Lemal E, Awuonda E, et al. Disseminating results: community response and input on Kisumu breastfeeding study. Translational Behavioral Medicine. 2015; 5 (2):207–215. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Reyna VF, Nelson WL, Han PK, Pignone MP. Decision making and cancer. American Psychologist. 2015; 70 (2):105–118. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Roy UB, Michel T, Carpenter A, et al. Peer reviewed: community-led cancer action councils in Queens, New York: process evaluation of an innovative partnership with the Queens Library System. Preventing Chronic Disease. 2014; 11 :130176. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Timmins F. Disseminating nursing research. Nursing Standard. 2015; 29 (48):34–39. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]

Logo for VIVA Open Publishing

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

16 21. Qualitative research dissemination

Chapter outline.

  • Ethical responsibility and cultural respectfulness (8 minute read time)
  • Critical considerations (5 minute read time)
  • Informing your dissemination plan (11 minute read time)
  • Final product taking shape (10 minute read time)

Content warning: Examples in this chapter contain references to research as a potential tool to stigmatize or oppress vulnerable groups, mistreatment and inequalities experienced by Native American tribes, sibling relationships, caregiving, child welfare, criminal justice and recidivism, first generation college students, Covid-19, school culture and race, health (in)equity, physical and sensory abilities, and transgender youth.

Your sweat and hard work has paid off!  You’ve planned your study, collected your data, and completed your analysis. But alas, no rest for the weary student researcher.  Now you need to share your findings. As researchers, we generally have some ideas where and with whom we desire to share our findings, but these plans may evolve and change during our research process.  Communicating our findings with a broader audience is a critical step in the research process, so make sure not to treat this like an afterthought. Remember, research is about making a contribution to collective knowledge-building in the area of study that you are interested in.  Indeed, research is of no value if there is no audience to receive it. You worked hard…get those findings out there!

In planning for this phase of research, we can consider a variety of methods for sharing our study findings. Among other options, we may choose to write our findings up as an article in a professional journal, provide a report to an organization, give testimony to a legislative group, or create a presentation for a community event. We will explore these options in a bit more detail below in section 21.4 where we talk more about different types of qualitative research products. We also want to think about our intended audience.

For your research, answer these two key questions as you are planning for dissemination:

  • Who are you targeting to communicate your findings to?  In other words, who needs to hear the results of your study?
  • What do you hope your audience will take away after learning about your study?

dissemination plan in research example

21.1 Ethical responsibility and cultural respectfulness

Learning Objectives

Learners will be able to…

  • Identify key ethical considerations in developing their qualitative research dissemination plan
  • Conceptualize how research dissemination may impact diverse groups, both presently and into the future

Have you ever been misrepresented or portrayed in a negative light? It doesn’t feel good. It especially doesn’t feel good when the person portraying us has power, control and influence.  While you might not feel powerful, research can be a powerful tool, and can be used and abused for many ends. Once research is out in the world, it is largely out of our control, so we need to approach dissemination with care. Be thoughtful about how you represent your work and take time to think through the potential implications it may have, both intended and unintended, for the people it represents.

As alluded to in the paragraph above, research comes with hefty responsibilities. You aren’t off the hook if you are conducting quantitative research.  While quantitative research deals with numbers, these numbers still represent people and their relationships to social problems. However, with qualitative research, we are often dealing with a smaller sample and trying to learn more from them. As such, our job often carries additional weight as we think about how we will represent our findings and the people they reflect. Furthermore, we probably hope that our research has an impact; that in some way, it leads to change around some issue. This is especially true as social work researchers. Our research often deals with oppressed groups, social problems, and inequality. However, it’s hard to predict the implications that our research may have. This suggests that we need to be especially thoughtful about how we present our research to others.

Two of the core values of social work involve respecting the inherent dignity and worth of each person, practicing with integrity, and behaving in a trustworthy manner [1] .  As social work researchers, to uphold these values, we need to consider how we are representing the people we are researching. Our work needs to honestly and accurately reflect our findings, but it also needs to be sensitive and respectful to the people it represents. In Chapter 8 we discussed research ethics and introduced the concept of beneficence or the idea that research needs to support the welfare of participants. Beneficence is particularly important as we think about our findings becoming public and how the public will receive, interpret and use this information. Thus, both as social workers and researchers, we need to be conscientious of how dissemination of our findings takes place.

As you think about the people in your sample and the communities or groups to which they belong, consider some of these questions:

  • How are participants being portrayed in my research?
  • What characteristics or findings are being shared or highlighted in my research that may directly or indirectly be associated with participants?
  • Have the groups that I am researching been stigmatized, stereotyped, and/or misrepresented in the past? If so, how does my research potentially reinforce or challenge these representations?
  • How might my research be perceived or interpreted by members of the community or group it represents?
  • In what ways does my research honor the dignity and worth of participants?

dissemination plan in research example

Qualitative research often has a voyeuristic quality to it, as we are seeking a window into participants’ lives by exploring their experiences, beliefs, and values. As qualitative researchers, we have a role as stewards or caretakers of data. We need to be mindful of how data are gathered, maintained, and most germane to our conversation here, how data are used. We need to craft research products that honor and respect individual participants (micro), our collective sample as a whole (meso), and the communities that our research may represent (macro).

As we prepare to disseminate our findings, our ethical responsibilities as researchers also involve honoring the commitments we have made during the research process. We need to think back to our early phases of the research process, including our initial conversations with research partners and other stakeholders who helped us to coordinate our research activities. If we made any promises along the way about how the findings would be presented or used, we need to uphold them here.  Additionally, we need to abide by what we committed to in our informed consent .  Part of our informed consent involves letting participants know how findings may be used.  We need to present our findings according to these commitments. We of course also have a commitment to represent our research honestly.

As an extension of our ethical responsibilities as researchers, we need to consider the impact that our findings may have, as well as our need to be socially conscientious researchers.  As scouts, we were taught to leave our campsite in a better state than when we arrived. I think it is helpful to think of research in these terms.  Think about the group(s) that may be represented by your research; what impact might your findings have for the lives of members of this group? Will it leave their lives in a better state than before you conducted your research? As a responsible researcher, you need to be thoughtful, aware and realistic about how your research findings might be interpreted and used by others. As social workers, while we hope that findings will be used to improve the lives of our clients, we can’t ignore that findings can also be used to further oppress or stigmatize vulnerable groups; research is not apolitical and we should not be naive about this. It is worth mentioning the concept of sustainable research here.  Sustainable research involves conducting research projects that have a long-term, sustainable impact for the social groups we work with. As researchers, this means that we need to actively plan for how our research will continue to benefit the communities we work with into the future. This can be supported by staying involved with these communities, routinely checking-in and seeking input from community members, and making sure to share our findings in ways that community members can access, understand, and utilize them. Nate Olson provides a very inspiring Ted Talk about the importance of building resilient communities. As you consider your research project, think about it in these terms.

Key Takeaways

  • As you think about how best to share your qualitative findings, remember that these findings represent people. As such, we have a responsibility as social work researchers to ensure that our findings are presented in honest, respectful, and culturally sensitive ways.
  • Since this phase of research deals with how we are going to share our findings with the public, we need to actively consider the potential implications of our research and how it may be interpreted and used.

Is your work, in some way, helping to contribute to a resilient and sustainable community? It may not be a big tangible project as described in Olson’s Ted Talk , but is it providing a resource for change and growth to a group of people, either directly or indirectly? Does it promote sustainability amongst the social networks that might be impacted by the research you are conducting?

21.2 Critical considerations

  • Identify how issues of power and control are present in the dissemination of qualitative research findings
  • Begin to examine and account for their own role in the qualitative research process, and address this in their findings

This is the part of our research that is shared with the public and because of this, issues like reciprocity, ownership, and transparency are relevant.  We need to think about who will have access to the tangible products of our research and how that research will get used. As researchers, we likely benefit directly from research products; perhaps it helps us to advance our career, obtain a good grade, or secure funding.  Our research participants often benefit indirectly by advancing knowledge about a topic that may be relevant or important to them, but often don’t experience the same direct tangible benefits that we do. However, a participatory perspective challenges us to involve community members from the outset in discussions about what changes would be most meaningful to their communities and what research products would be most helpful in accomplishing those changes. This is especially important as it relates to the role of research as a tool to support empowerment.

Ownership of research products is also important as an issue of power and control. We will discuss a range of venues for presenting your qualitative research, some of which are more amenable to shared ownership than others.  For instance, if you are publishing your findings in an academic journal, you will need to sign an agreement with that publisher about how the information in that article can be used and who has access to it.  Similarly, if you are presenting findings at a national conference, travel and other conference-related expenses and requirements may make access to these research products prohibitive. In these instances, the researcher and the organization(s) they negotiate with (e.g. the publishing company, the conference organizing body) share control.  However, disseminating qualitative findings in a public space, public record, or community-owned resource means that more equitable ownership might be negotiated. An equitable or reciprocal arrangement might not always be able to be reached, however. Transparency about who owns the products of research is important if you are working with community partners. To support this, establishing a Memorandum Of Understanding (MOU) or Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) e arly in the research process is important. This document should clearly articulate roles, responsibilities, and a number of other details, such as ownership of research products between the researcher and the partnering group(s).

Resources for learning more about MOUs and MOAs

Center for Community Health and Development, University of Kansas. (n.d.). Community toolbox: Section 9. Understanding and writing contracts and memoranda of agreement [Webpage].

Collaborative Center for Health Equity, University of Wisconson Madison. (n.d.). Standard agreement for research with community organizations [Template]

Office of Research, UC Davis. (n.d.). Research MOUs [Webpage].

Office of Research, The University of Texas at Dallas. (n.d.). Types of agreements [Webpage].

In our discussion about qualitative research, we have also frequently identified the need for the qualitative researcher to account for their role throughout the research process.  Part of this accounting can specifically apply to qualitative research products. This is our opportunity to demonstrate to our audience that we have been reflective throughout the course of the study and how this has influenced the work we did.  Some qualitative research studies include a positionality statement within the final product. This is often toward the beginning of the report or the presentation and includes information about the researcher(s)’s identity and worldview, particularly details relevant to the topic being studied. This can include why you are invested in the study, what experiences have shaped how you have come to think about the topic, and any positions or assumptions you make with respect to the topic.  This is another way to encourage transparency. It can also be a means of relegating or at least acknowledging some of our power in the research process, as it can provide one modest way for us, as the researcher, to be a bit more exposed or vulnerable, although this is a far cry from making the risks of research equitable between the researcher and the researched. However, the positionality statement can be a place to integrate our identities, who we are as an individual, a researcher, and a social work practitioner.  Granted, for some of us that might be volumes, but we need to condense this down to a brief but informative statement – don’t let it eclipse the research! It should just be enough to inform the audience and allow them to draw their own conclusions about who is telling the story of this research and how well they can be trusted. This student provides a helpful discussion of the positionality statement that she developed for her study.  Reviewing your reflexive journal (discussed in chapter  20 as a tool to enhance qualitative rigor) can help in identifying underlying assumptions and positions you might have grounded in your reactions throughout the research process. These insights can be integrated into your positionality statement. Please take a few minutes to watch this informative video of a student further explaining what a positionality statement is and providing a good example of one.

  • The products of qualitative research often benefit the researcher disproportionately when compared to research participants or the communities they represent.  Whenever possible, we can seek out ways to disseminate research in ways that addresses this imbalance and supports more tangible and direct benefits to community members.
  • Openly positioning ourselves in our dissemination plans can be an important way for qualitative researchers to be transparent and account for our role.

21.3 Informing your dissemination plan

  • Appraise important dimensions of planning that will inform their research dissemination plan, including: audience, purpose, context and content
  • Apply this appraisal to key decisions they will need to make when designing their qualitative research product(s)

This section will offer you a general overview of points to consider as you form the dissemination plan for your research. We will start with considerations regarding your audience, then turn our attention to the purpose of your research, and finally consider the importance of attending to both content and context as you plan for your final research product(s).

Perhaps the most important consideration you have as you plan how to present your work is your audience. Research is a product that is meant to be consumed, and because of this, we need to be conscious of our consumers. We will speak more extensively about knowing your audience in Chapter 24 , devoted to both sharing and consuming research. Regardless of who your audience is (e.g. community members, classmates, research colleagues, practicing social workers, state legislator), there will be common elements that will be important to convey. While the way you present them will vary greatly according to who is listening, Table 21.1 offers a brief review of the elements that you will want your audience to leave with.

Once we determine who our audience is, we can further tailor our dissemination plan to that specific group.  Of course, we may be presenting our findings in more than one venue, and in that case, we will have multiple plans that will meet the needs of each specific audience.

It’s a good idea to pitch your plan first.  However you plan to present your findings, you will want to have someone preview before you share with a wider audience. Ideally, whoever previews will be a person from your target audience or at least someone who knows them well. Getting feedback can go a long way in helping us with the clarity with which we convey our ideas and the impact they have on our audience. This might involve giving a practice speech, having someone review your article or report, or practice discussing your research one-on-one, as you would with a poster presentation.  Let’s talk about some specific audiences that you may be targeting and their unique needs or expectations.

Below I will go through some brief considerations for each of these different audiences. I have tried to focus this discussion on elements that are relevant specific to qualitative studies since we do revisit this topic in Chapter 24 .

dissemination plan in research example

Research community

When presenting your findings to an academic audience or other research-related community, it is probably safe to a make a few assumptions. This audience is likely to have a general understanding of the research process and what it entails.  For this reason, you will have to do less explaining of research-related terms and concepts. However, compared to other audiences, you will probably have to provide a bit more detail about what steps you took in your research process, especially as they relate to qualitative rigor, because this group will want to know about how your research was carried out and how you arrived at your decisions throughout the research process. Additionally, you will want to make a clear connection between which qualitative design you chose and your research question; a methodological justification . Researchers will also want to have a good idea about how your study fits within the wider body of scientific knowledge that it is related to and what future studies you feel are needed based on your findings. You are likely to encounter this audience if you are disseminating through a peer-reviewed journal article, presenting at a research conference, or giving an invited talk in an academic setting.

Professional community

We often find ourselves presenting our research to other professionals, such as social workers in the field. While this group may have some working knowledge of research, they are likely to be much more focused on how your research is related to the work they do and the clients they serve. While you will need to convey your design accurately, this audience is most likely to be invested in what you learned and what it means (especially for practice). You will want to set the stage for the discussion by doing a good job expressing your connection to and passion for the topic (a positionality statemen t might be particularly helpful here), what we know about the issue, and why it is important to their professional lives. You will want to give good contextual information for your qualitative findings so that practitioners can know if these findings might apply to people they work with. Also, as since social work practitioners generally place emphasis on person-centered practice, hearing the direct words of participants (quotes) whenever possible, is likely to be impactful as we present qualitative results.  Where academics and researchers will want to know about implications for future research, professionals will want to know about implications for how this information could help transform services in the future or understand the clients they serve.

Lay community

The lay community are people who don’t necessarily have specialized training or knowledge of the subject, but may be interested or invested for some other reason; perhaps the issue you are studying affects them or a loved one. Since this is the general public, you should expect to spend the most time explaining scientific knowledge and research processes and terminology in accessible terms. Furthermore, you will want to invest some time establishing a personal connection to the topic (like I talked about for the professional community). They will likely want to know why you are interested and why you are a credible source for this information.  While this group may not be experts on research, as potential members of the group(s) that you may be researching, you do want to remember that they are experts in their own community. As such, you will want to be especially mindful of approaching how you present findings with a sense of cultural humility (although hopefully you have this in mind across all audiences). It will be good to discuss what steps you took to ensure that your findings accurately reflect what participants shared with you ( rigor ). You will want to be most clear with this group about what they should take away, without overstating your findings.

Regardless of who your audience is, remember that you are an ambassador.  You may represent a topic, a population, an organization, or the whole institution of research, or any combination of these.  Make sure to present your findings honestly, ethically, and clearly.  Furthermore, I’m assuming that the research you are conducting is important because you have spent a lot of time and energy to arrive at your findings. Make sure that this importance comes through in your dissemination.  Tell a compelling story with your research!  

Who needs to hear the message of your qualitative research?

  • Example. If you are presenting your research about caregiver fatigue to a caregiver support group, you won’t need to spend time describing the role of caregivers because your audience will have lived experience.
  • Example. If you are presenting your research findings to a group of academics, you wouldn’t have to explain what a sampling frame is, but if you are sharing it with a group of community members from a local housing coalition, you will need to help them understand what this is (or maybe use a phrase that is more meaningful to them).
  • Example. If you are speaking to a group of child welfare workers about your study examining trauma-informed communication strategies, they are probably going to want to know how these strategies might impact the work that they do.
  • Example. If you are sharing your findings at a meeting with a council member, it may be especially meaningful to share direct quotes from constituents.

Being clear about the purpose of your research from the outset is immeasurably helpful.  What are you hoping to accomplish with your study?  We can certainly look to the overarching purpose of qualitative research, that being to develop/expand/challenge/explore understanding of some topic.  But, what are you specifically attempting to accomplish with your study? Two of the main reasons we conduct research are to raise awareness about a topic and to create change around some issue. Let’s say you are conducting a study to better understand the experience of recidivism in the criminal justice system. This is an example of a study whose main purpose is to better understand and raise awareness around a particular social phenomenon (recidivism). On the other hand, you could also conduct a study that examines the use of strengths-based strategies by probation officers to reduce recidivism. This would fall into the category of research promoting a specific change (the use of strengths-based strategies among probation officers). I would wager that your research topic falls into one of these two very broad categories. If this is the case, how would you answer the corresponding questions below?

Are you seeking to raise awareness of a particular issue with your research? If so,

  • Whose awareness needs raising? 
  • What will “speak” most effectively to this group? 
  • How can you frame your research so that it has the most impact?

Are you seeking to create a specific change with your research? If so,

  • What will that change look like? 
  • How can your research best support that change occurring? 
  • Who has the power to create that change and what will be most compelling in reaching them? 

How you answer these questions will help to inform your dissemination plan.  For instance, your dissemination plan will likely look very different if you are trying to persuade a group of legislators to pass a bill versus trying to share a new model or theory with academic colleagues. Considering your purposes will help you to convey the message of your research most effectively and efficiently. We invest a lot of ourselves in our research, so make sure to keep your sights focused on what you hope to accomplish with it!

Content and context

As a reminder, qualitative research often has a dual responsibility for conveying both content and context. You can think of content as the actual data that is shared with us or that we obtain, while context is the circumstances under which that data sharing occurs. Content conveys the message and context provides us the clues with which we can decode and make sense of that message.

While quantitative research may provide some contextual information, especially in regards to describing its sample, it rarely receives as much attention or detail as it does in qualitative studies. Because of this, you will want to plan for how you will attend to both the content and context of your study in planning for your dissemination.

  • Research is an intentional act; you are trying to accomplish something with it. To be successful, you need to approach dissemination planfully.
  • Planning the most effective way of sharing our qualitative findings requires looking beyond what is convenient or even conventional, and requires us to consider a number of factors, including our audience, the purpose or intent of our research and the nature of both the content and the context that we are trying to convey.

21.4 Final product taking shape

  • Evaluate the various means of disseminating research and consider their applicability for your research project
  • Determine appropriate building blocks for designing your qualitative research product

As we have discussed, qualitative research takes many forms. It should then come as no surprise that qualitative research products also come in many different packages. To help guide you as the final products of your research take shape, we will discuss some of the building blocks or elements that you are likely to include as tools in sharing your qualitative findings.  These are the elements that will allow you to flesh out the details of your dissemination plan.

Building blocks

There are many building blocks that are at our disposal as we formulate our qualitative research product(s). Quantitative researchers have charts, graphs, tables, and narrative descriptions of numerical output.  These tools allow the quantitative researcher to tell the story of their research with numbers. As qualitative researchers, we are tasked with telling the story of our research findings as well, but our tools look different.  While this isn’t an exhaustive list of tools that are at our disposal as qualitative researchers, a number of commonly used elements in sharing qualitative findings are discussed here.  Depending on your study design and the type of data you are working with, you may use one or some combination of the building blocks discussed below.

Themes are a very common element when presenting qualitative research findings. They may be called themes, but they may also go by other names: categories, dimensions, main ideas, etc.  Themes offer the qualitative researcher a way to share ideas that emerged from your analysis that were shared by multiple participants or across multiple sources of data.  They help us to distill the large amounts of qualitative data that we might be working with into more concise and manageable pieces of information that are more consumable for our audience. When integrating themes into your qualitative research product, you will want to offer your audience: the title of the theme (try to make this as specific/meaningful as possible), a brief description or definition of the theme, any accompanying dimensions or sub-themes that may be relevant, and examples (when appropriate).

Quotes offer you the opportunity to share participants’ exact words with your audience.  Of course, we can’t only rely on quotes, because we need to knit the information that is shared into one cohesive description of our findings and an endless list of quotes is unlikely to support this. Because of this, you will want to be judicious in selecting your quotes. Choose quotes that can stand on their own, best reflect the sentiment that is being captured by the theme or category of findings that you are discussing, and are likely to speak to and be understood by your audience.  Quotes are a great way to help your findings come alive or to give them greater depth and significance. If you are using quotes, be sure to do so in a balanced manner – don’t only use them in some sections but not others, or use a large number to support one theme and only one or two for another.  Finally, we often provide some brief demographic information in a parenthetical reference following a quote so our reader knows a little bit about the person who shared the information.  This helps to provide some context for the quote.

Kohli and Pizarro (2016) [2] provide a good example of a qualitative study using quotes to exemplify their themes. In their study, they gathered data through short-answer questionnaires and in-depth interviews from racial-justice oriented teachers of Color. Their study explored the experiences and motivations of these teachers and the environments in which they worked. As you might guess, the words of the teacher-participants were especially powerful and the quotes provided in the results section were very informative and important in helping to fulfill the aim of the research study. Take a few minutes to review this article.  Note how the authors provide a good amount of detail as to what each of the themes meant and how they used the quotes to demonstrate and support each theme. The quotes help bring the themes to life and anchor the results in the actual words of the participants (suggesting greater trustworthiness in the findings).   

Figure 21.1 below offers a more extensive example of a theme being reported along with supporting quotes from a study conducted by Karabanow, Gurman, and Naylor (2012) [3] . This study focused on the role of work activities in the lives of “Guatemalan street youth”. One of the important themes had to do with intersection of work and identity for this group.  In this example, brief quotes are used within the body of the description of the theme, and also longer quotes (full sentence(s)) to demonstrate important aspects of the description.

Pictures or videos

If our data collection involves the use of photographs, drawings, videos or other artistic expression of participants or collection of artifacts, we may very well include selections of these in our dissemination of qualitative findings.  In fact, if we failed to include these, it would seem a bit inauthentic.  For the same reason we include quotes as direct representations of participants’ contributions, it is a good idea to provide direct reference to other visual forms of data that support or demonstrate our findings. We might incorporate narrative descriptions of these elements or quotes from participants that help to interpret their meaning. Integrating pictures and quotes is especially common if we are conducting a study using a Photovoice approach, as we discussed in Chapter 17 , where a main goal of the research technique is to bring together participant generated visuals with collaborative interpretation.

Take some time to explore the website linked here. It is the webpage for The Philidelphia Collaborative for Health Equity’s PhotoVoice Exhibit Gallery and offers a good demonstration of research that brings together pictures and text.

Graphic or figure

Qualitative researchers will often create a graphic or figure to visually reflect how the various pieces of your findings come together or relate to each other. Using a visual representation can be especially compelling for people who are visual learners.  When you are using a visual representation, you will want to: label all elements clearly; include all the components or themes that are part of your findings; pay close attention to where you place and how you orient each element (as their spatial arrangement carries meaning); and finally, offer a brief but informative explanation that helps your reader to interpret your representation.   A special subcategory of visual representation is process.  These are especially helpful to lay out a sequential relationship within your findings or a model that has emerged out of your analysis. A process or model will show the ‘flow’ of ideas or knowledge in our findings, the logic of how one concept proceeds to the next and what each step of the model entails.

Noonan and colleagues (2004) [4] conducted a qualitative study that examined the career development of high achieving women with physical and sensory disabilities. Through the analysis of their interviews, they built a model of career development based on these women’s experiences with a figure that helps to conceptually illustrate the model. They place the ‘dyanmic self’ in the center, surrounded by a dotted (permeable) line, with a number of influences outside the line (i.e. family influences, disability impact, career attitudes and behaviors, sociopoltical context, developmental opportunities and social support) and arrows directed inward and outward between each influence and the dynamic self to demonstrate mutual influence/exchange between them.  The image is included in the results section of their study and brings together “core categories” and demonstrates how they work together in the emergent theory or how they relate to each other. Because so many of our findings are dynamic, like Noonan and colleagues, showing interaction and exchange between ideas, figures can be especially helpful in conveying this as we share our results.

Titled "restructuring at work". There are a series of boxes in a row with arrows leading from one to another. The first states "unresolved work-related conflicts". The second box states, "shaming process" with two bullets stating "interpersonal shaming and "intrapersonal shaming". The 3rd box states "making efforts to please" and has 3 bullets labeled "increased work intensity", "overtime", and "sickness presenteeism". The 4th box is labeled "mental overload" and contains 3 bullets, labeled "chronic tiredness and fatigue", "social withdrawal", and "estrangement from self and others". The fifth and final box is labeled "sick leave".

Going one step further than the graphic or figure discussed above, qualitative researchers may decide to combine and synthesize findings into one integrated representation. In the case of the graphic or figure, the individual elements still maintain their distinctiveness, but are brought together to reflect how they are related. In a composite however, rather than just showing that they are related (static), the audience actually gets to ‘see’ the elements interacting (dynamic). The integrated and interactive findings of a composite can take many forms.  It might be a written narrative, such as a fictionalized case study that reflects of highlights the many aspects that emerged during analysis. It could be a poem, dance, painting or any other performance or medium. Ultimately, a composite offers an audience a meaningful and comprehensive expression of our findings. If you are choosing to utilize a composite, there is an underlying assumption that is conveyed: you are suggesting that the findings of your study are best understood holistically. By discussing each finding individually, they lose some of their potency or significance, so a composite is required to bring them together.  As an example of a composite, consider that you are conducting research with a number of First Nations Peoples in Canada.  After consulting with a number of Elders and learning about the importance of oral traditions and the significance of storytelling, you collaboratively determine that the best way to disseminate your findings will be to create and share a story as a means of presenting your research findings.  The use of composites also assumes that the ‘truths’ revealed in our data can take many forms. The Transgender Youth Project hosted by the Mandala Center for Change , is an example of legislative theatre combining research, artistic expression, and political advocacy and a good example of action-oriented research.

While you haven’t heard much about numbers in our qualitative chapters, I’m going to break with tradition and speak briefly about them here.  For many qualitative projects we do include some numeric information in our final product(s), mostly in the way of counts. Counts usually show up in the way of frequency of demographic characteristics of our sample or characteristics regarding our artifacts, if they aren’t people.  These may be included as a table or they may be integrated into the narrative we provide, but in either case, our goal in including this information is to offer the reader information so they can better understand who or what our sample is representing.  The other time we sometimes include count information is in respect to the frequency and coverage of the themes or categories that are represented in our data. Frequency information about a theme can help the reader to know how often an idea came up in our analysis, while coverage can help them to know how widely dispersed this idea was (e.g. did nearly everyone mention this, or was it a small group of participants).

  • There are a wide variety of means by which you can deliver your qualitative research to the public.  Choose one that takes into account the various considerations that we have discussed above and also honors the ethical commitments that we outlined early in this chapter.
  • Presenting qualitative research requires some amount of creativity.  Utilize the building blocks discussed in this chapter to help you consider how to most authentically and effectively convey your message to a wider audience.

What means of delivery will you be choosing for your dissemination plan?

What building blocks will best convey your qualitaitve results to your audience?

  • National Association of Social Workers. (2017). NASW code of ethics. Retrieved from ↵
  • Kohli, R., & Pizarro, M. (2016). Fighting to educate our own: Teachers of Color, relational accountability, and the struggle for racial justice. Equity & Excellence in Education, 49 (1), 72-84. ↵
  • Karabanow, J., Gurman, E., & Naylor, T. (2012). Street youth labor as an Expression of survival and self-worth. Critical Social Work, 13 (2). ↵
  • Noonan, B. M., Gallor, S. M., Hensler-McGinnis, N. F., Fassinger, R. E., Wang, S., & Goodman, J. (2004). Challenge and success: A Qualitative study of the career development of highly achieving women with physical and sensory disabilities. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51 (1), 68. ↵
  • Ede, L., & Starrin, B. (2014). Unresolved conflicts and shaming processes: risk factors for long-term sick leave for mental-health reasons. Nordic Journal of Social Research, 5 , 39-54. ↵

how you plan to share your research findings

One of the three values indicated in the Belmont report. An obligation to protect people from harm by maximizing benefits and minimizing risks.

A written agreement between parties that want to participate in a collaborative project.

A research journal that helps the researcher to reflect on and consider their thoughts and reactions to the research process and how it may be shaping the study

Context is the circumstances surrounding an artifact, event, or experience.

Rigor is the process through which we demonstrate, to the best of our ability, that our research is empirically sound and reflects a scientific approach to knowledge building.

Content is the substance of the artifact (e.g. the words, picture, scene). It is what can actually be observed.

Graduate research methods in social work Copyright © 2020 by Matthew DeCarlo, Cory Cummings, Kate Agnelli is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

  • Reserve a study room
  • Library Account
  • Undergraduate Students
  • Graduate Students
  • Faculty & Staff

Create a Research Dissemination Plan

  • Research Dissemination
  • Dissemination Plan Examples
  • Dissemination Plan Template

Guide Background

Questions or suggestions.

Profile Photo

This guide was developed by the Faculty Learning Community (FLC) on Dissemination of Research Findings Using Web-Based Platforms. Offered in the 2015-16 academic year, the members explored various web-based dissemination methods, created and implemented their dissemination plans. This guide is a reflection of the lessons learned and resources that were accessed to inform their learning and plans.

The FLC was grounded in a community-engaged approach to research, a valuable framework that enables researchers to produce results that can be directly translated to improved outcomes. Combining this framework with the affordances of web-based technologies allows those who can benefit from research and researchers themselves to engage in critical conversations and to share information in a way that can be meaningful and impact the well-being of our communities.

Instructor, College Behavioral and Emotional Health, College of Humanities and Sciences

Director, ALT Lab, Office of the Provost

Jason Coats

Assistant Professor, Focused Inquiry, University College

Jennifer Early

Strategic Project Manager and Research Associate, Division of Community Engagement

Trish Edinboro

Research Associate, Health Administration, School of Allied Health Professions

Valerie Holton

Director of Community Engaged Research, Division of Community Engagement, Office of the Provost

Faisal Ilyas

Research Assistant, IT Specialist, Social Media Manager, Social Network Analyst, RedCap Manager, Division of Epidemiology, School of Medicine

Hillary Miller

Scholarly Communications Outreach Librarian, VCU Libraries

Kate Schifano

Community Health Educator, Massey Cancer Center

Adai Tefera

Assistant Professor, School of Education

Alex Wagaman

Assistant Professor, School of Social Work

Sponsored by the Division of Community Engagement and VCU AltLab

  • << Previous: Dissemination Plan Template
  • Last Updated: Nov 20, 2023 11:33 AM
  • URL:

UHI Logo

Latest News | Library Homepage | VLE | eMail | Contact Us |

Systematic Reviews

  • Is a systematic review appropriate for my topic?
  • Protocols and Reporting Standards
  • Searching - the Basics
  • Search strategy
  • Grey Literature
  • Using what you have found to find more
  • Critical Appraisal
  • Further Support


The publishing maze.

  • Implementation

Once you have completed the work of the systematic review you will want to disseminate the results.  There are a range of option to do this and this page will examine these.

If you are working with the Cochrane or Campbell Collaborations they have onboard publishing guidance -  Cochrane  (link opens in new window),  Campbell  (link opens in new window).

If you are working with the NHS the NHS Learning Academy has produced an  extremely useful set of writing for publications FAQs  (link opens in new window).  NHS Education Scotland (NES) have also produced a getting published toolkit (link opens in new window) and  TURAS leaning module  (link opens in new window)

If you are working within an academic organisation it is worth checking out what deals are available for you to and advice on where to publish.  For UHI staff and students there is a  Libguide  (link opens in new window) devoted to the topic

The Library holds some useful books on the publishing process.

Cover Art

For any assistance/advice required please contact the Library Team at: [email protected]   

  • << Previous: Further Support
  • Next: Implementation >>
  • Last Updated: May 28, 2024 12:27 PM
  • URL:

Case Western Reserve University

  • Research Data Lifecycle Guide

Developing a Data Management Plan

This section breaks down different topics required for the planning and preparation of data used in research at Case Western Reserve University. In this phase you should understand the research being conducted, the type and methods used for collecting data, the methods used to prepare and analyze the data, addressing budgets and resources required, and have a sound understanding of how you will manage data activities during your research project.

Many federal sponsors of Case Western Reserve funded research have required data sharing plans in research proposals since 2003. As of Jan. 25, 2023, the National Institutes of Health has revised its data management and sharing requirements. 

This website is designed to provide basic information and best practices to seasoned and new investigators as well as detailed guidance for adhering to the revised NIH policy.  

Basics of Research Data Management

What is research data management?

Research data management (RDM) comprises a set of best practices that include file organization, documentation, storage, backup, security, preservation, and sharing, which affords researchers the ability to more quickly, efficiently, and accurately find, access, and understand their own or others' research data.

Why should you care about research data management?

RDM practices, if applied consistently and as early in a project as possible, can save you considerable time and effort later, when specific data are needed, when others need to make sense of your data, or when you decide to share or otherwise upload your data to a digital repository. Adopting RDM practices will also help you more easily comply with the data management plan (DMP) required for obtaining grants from many funding agencies and institutions.

Does data need to be retained after a project is completed?

Research data must be retained in sufficient detail and for an adequate period of time to enable appropriate responses to questions about accuracy, authenticity, primacy and compliance with laws and regulations governing the conduct of the research. External funding agencies will each have different requirements regarding storage, retention, and availability of research data. Please carefully review your award or agreement for the disposition of data requirements and data retention policies.

A good data management plan begins by understanding the sponsor requirements funding your research. As a principal investigator (PI) it is your responsibility to be knowledgeable of sponsors requirements. The Data Management Plan Tool (DMPTool) has been designed to help PIs adhere to sponsor requirements efficiently and effectively. It is strongly recommended that you take advantage of the DMPTool.  

CWRU has an institutional account with DMPTool that enables users to access all of its resources via your Single Sign On credentials. CWRU's DMPTool account is supported by members of the Digital Scholarship team with the Freedman Center for Digital Scholarship. Please use the RDM Intake Request form to schedule a consultation if you would like support or guidance regarding developing a Data Management Plan.

Some basic steps to get started:

  • Sign into the  DMPTool site  to start creating a DMP for managing and sharing your data. 
  • On the DMPTool site, you can find the most up to date templates for creating a DMP for a long list of funders, including the NIH, NEH, NSF, and more. 
  • Explore sample DMPs to see examples of successful plans .

Be sure that your DMP is addressing any and all federal and/or funder requirements and associated DMP templates that may apply to your project. It is strongly recommended that investigators submitting proposals to the NIH utilize this tool. 

The NIH is mandating Data Management and Sharing Plans for all proposals submitted after Jan. 25, 2023.  Guidance for completing a NIH Data Management Plan has its own dedicated content to provide investigators detailed guidance on development of these plans for inclusion in proposals. 

A Data Management Plan can help create and maintain reliable data and promote project success. DMPs, when carefully constructed and reliably adhered to, help guide elements of your research and data organization.

A DMP can help you:

Document your process and data.

  • Maintain a file with information on researchers and collaborators and their roles, sponsors/funding sources, methods/techniques/protocols/standards used, instrumentation, software (w/versions), references used, any applicable restrictions on its distribution or use.
  • Establish how you will document file changes, name changes, dates of changes, etc. Where will you record of these changes? Try to keep this sort of information in a plain text file located in the same folder as the files to which it pertains.
  • How are derived data products created? A DMP encourages consistent description of data processing performed, software (including version number) used, and analyses applied to data.
  • Establish regular forms or templates for data collection. This helps reduce gaps in your data, promotes consistency throughout the project.

Explain your data

  • From the outset, consider why your data were collected, what the known and expected conditions may be for collection, and information such as time and place, resolution, and standards of data collected.
  • What attributes, fields, or parameters will be studied and included in your data files? Identify and describe these in each file that employs them.
  • For an overview of data dictionaries, see the USGS page here:

DMP Requirements

Why are you being asked to include a data management plan (DMP) in your grant application? For grants awarded by US governmental agencies, two federal memos from the US Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), issued in 2013 and 2015 , respectively, have prompted this requirement. These memos mandate public access to federally- (and, thus, taxpayer-) funded research results, reflecting a commitment by the government to greater accountability and transparency. While "results" generally refers to the publications and reports produced from a research project, it is increasingly used to refer to the resulting data as well.

Federal research-funding agencies  have responded to the OSTP memos by issuing their own guidelines and requirements for grant applicants (see below), specifying whether and how research data in particular are to be managed in order to be publicly and properly accessible.

  • NSF—National Science Foundation "Proposals submitted or due on or after January 18, 2011, must include a supplementary document of no more than two pages labeled 'Data Management Plan'. This supplementary document should describe how the proposal will conform to NSF policy on the dissemination and sharing of research results." Note: Additional requirements may apply per Directorate, Office, Division, Program, or other NSF unit.
  • NIH—National Institutes of Health "To facilitate data sharing, investigators submitting a research application requesting $500,000 or more of direct costs in any single year to NIH on or after October 1, 2003 are expected to include a plan for sharing final research data for research purposes, or state why data sharing is not possible."
  • NASA—National Aeronautics and Space Administration "The purpose of a Data Management Plan (DMP) is to address the management of data from Earth science missions, from the time of their data collection/observation, to their entry into permanent archives."
  • DOD—Department of Defense "A Data Management Plan (DMP) describing the scientific data expected to be created or gathered in the course of a research project must be submitted to DTIC at the start of each research effort. It is important that DoD researchers document plans for preserving data at the outset, keeping in mind the potential utility of the data for future research or to support transition to operational or other environments. Otherwise, the data is lost as researchers move on to other efforts. The essential descriptive elements of the DMP are listed in section 3 of DoDI 3200.12, although the format of the plan may be adjusted to conform to standards established by the relevant scientific discipline or one that meets the requirements of the responsible Component"
  • Department of Education "The purpose of this document is to describe the implementation of this policy on public access to data and to provide guidance to applicants for preparing the Data Management Plan (DMP) that must outline data sharing and be submitted with the grant application. The DMP should describe a plan to provide discoverable and citable dataset(s) with sufficient documentation to support responsible use by other researchers, and should address four interrelated concerns—access, permissions, documentation, and resources—which must be considered in the earliest stages of planning for the grant."
  • " Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI) Provides access to free, publicly-available research sponsored by the Department of Energy (DOE), including technical reports, bibliographic citations, journal articles, conference papers, books, multimedia, software, and data.

Data Management Best Practices

As you plan to collect data for research, keep in mind the following best practices. 

Keep Your Data Accessible to You

  • Store your temporary working files somewhere easily accessible, like on a local hard drive or shared server.
  • While cloud storage is a convenient solution for storage and sharing, there are often concerns about data privacy and preservation. Be sure to only put data in the cloud that you are comfortable with and that your funding and/or departmental requirements allow.
  • For long-term storage, data should be put into preservation systems that are well-managed. [U]Tech provides several long-term data storage options for cloud and campus. 
  • Don't keep your original data on a thumb drive or portable hard drive, as it can be easily lost or stolen.
  • Think about file formats that have a long life and that are readable by many programs. Formats like ascii, .txt, .csv, .pdf are great for long term  preservation.
  • A DMP is not a replacement for good data management practices, but it can set you on the right path if it is consistently followed. Consistently revisit your plan to ensure you are following it and adhering to funder requirements.


  • Know the difference between storing and preserving your data. True preservation is the ongoing process of making sure your data are secure and accessible for future generations. Many sponsors have preferred or recommended data repositories. The DMP tool can help you identify these preferred repositories. 
  • Identify data with long-term value. Preserve the raw data and any intermediate/derived products that are expensive to reproduce or can be directly used for analysis. Preserve any scripted code that was used to clean and transform the data.
  • Whenever converting your data from one format to another, keep a copy of the original file and format to avoid loss or corruption of your important files.
  • Leverage online platforms like OSF can help your group organize, version, share, and preserve your data, if the sponsor hasn’t specified a specific platform.
  • Adhere to federal sponsor requirements on utilizing accepted data repositories (NIH dbGaP, NIH SRA, NIH CRDC, etc.) for preservation. 

Backup, Backup, Backup

  • The general rule is to keep 3 copies of your data: 2 copies onsite, 1 offsite.
  • Backup your data regularly and frequently - automate the process if possible. This may mean weekly duplication of your working files to a separate drive, syncing your folders to a cloud service like Box, or dedicating a block of time every week to ensure you've copied everything to another location.


  • Establish a consistent, descriptive filing system that is intelligible to future researchers and does not rely on your own inside knowledge of your research.
  • A descriptive directory and file-naming structure should guide users through the contents to help them find whatever they are looking for.

Naming Conventions

  • Use consistent, descriptive filenames that reliably indicate the contents of the file.
  • If your discipline requires or recommends particular naming conventions, use them!
  • Do not use spaces between words. Use either camelcase or underscores to separate words
  • Include LastnameFirstname descriptors where appropriate.
  • Avoid using MM-DD-YYYY formats
  • Do not append vague descriptors like "latest" or "final" to your file versions. Instead, append the version's date or a consistently iterated version number.

Clean Your Data

  • Mistakes happen, and often researchers don't notice at first. If you are manually entering data, be sure to double-check the entries for consistency and duplication. Often having a fresh set of eyes will help to catch errors before they become problems.
  • Tabular data can often be error checked by sorting the fields alphanumerically to catch simple typos, extra spaces, or otherwise extreme outliers. Be sure to save your data before sorting it to ensure you do not disrupt the records!
  • Programs like OpenRefine  are useful for checking for consistency in coding for records and variables, catching missing values, transforming data, and much more.

What should you do if you need assistance implementing RDM practices?

Whether it's because you need discipline-specific metadata standards for your data, help with securing sensitive data, or assistance writing a data management plan for a grant, help is available to you at CWRU. In addition to consulting the resources featured in this guide, you are encouraged to contact your department's liaison librarian.

If you are planning to submit a research proposal and need assistance with budgeting for data storage and or applications used to capture, manage, and or process data UTech provides information and assistance including resource boilerplates that list what centralized resources are available. 

More specific guidance for including a budget for Data Management and Sharing is included on this document: Budgeting for Data Management and Sharing . 

Custody of Research Data

The PI is the custodian of research data, unless agreed on in writing otherwise and the agreement is on file with the University, and is responsible for the collection, management, and retention of research data. The PI should adopt an orderly system of data organization and should communicate the chosen system to all members of a research group and to the appropriate administrative personnel, where applicable. Particularly for long-term research projects, the PI should establish and maintain procedures for the protection and management of essential records.

CWRU Custody of Research Data Policy  

Data Sharing

Many funding agencies require data to be shared for the purposes of reproducibility and other important scientific goals. It is important to plan for the timely release and sharing of final research data for use by other researchers.  The final release of data should be included as a key deliverable of the DMP. Knowledge of the discipline-specific database, data repository, data enclave, or archive store used to disseminate the data should also be documented as needed. 

The NIH is mandating Data Management and Sharing Plans for all proposals submitted after Jan. 25, 2023. Guidance for completing a NIH Data Management and Sharing Plan  has its own dedicated content to provide investigators detailed guidance on development of these plans for inclusion in proposals.

Language selection

  • Français fr

Research Planning Checklist (DDN2-J10)


This job aid presents a checklist of questions to guide the planning of efficient, well-resourced, and organized user research at any stage in the product or service design process.

Published: April 23, 2024 Type: Job aid

Download as PDF (276 KB)

dissemination plan in research example

Research planning checklist

This job aid offers a checklist made up of questions that need to be answered before performing design research.

The checklist can be used to include all the necessary component into the research plan.

Desired outcome

The structured, well-organised research plan.

When to use

Use this job aid at the planning stage of your design research.

Pairs well with

  • Choosing the Right User Research Method (DDN2-J11)
  • Best Practices for Protecting Participant Data (DDN2-J08)

As you develop your research plan, refer to this checklist to determine whether you completed the question specific components/tasks to answer the following questions:

What is the goal of your research?

Purpose and goals of the research

What is the value of this work?

​​Purpose of the plan ​​Rationale

Who are the people involved?

User tasks, metrics, and usability goals, such as maximum time on task and other success criteria (if applicable) ​​User profiles (characteristics of target participants for the research) Recruitment plan Stakeholder engagement

What methods will be used?

Choice and rationale for each research method ​​ Questionnaires ​​Note-taking and question-asking guidelines for observers, including how to collaborate in effective data gathering without biasing the sessions Facilitator script with questions for participants, including consent forms Methods of data analysis and synthesis ​​Research ethics documents:

  • Data management plan
  • Privacy, confidentiality and anonymity

What resources are needed?

Budget ​​ Expectations about deliverables and timing ​​ Team:

  • Expectations and roles
  • To-do lists

​​Schedule ​​ Equipment and supplies ​​ Location information and contact details Checklists, documents and forms

Source: Visit Project Management for User Research: The Plan and Building a research plan with five simple questions – Canadian Digital Service to learn more.

Research Planning Checklist

Event: Brave Conversations and Bold Actions When Building Accessible and Inclusive Workplaces

dissemination plan in research example

Event: The Trust Series: Trust and Misinformation in Digital Information Ecosystems (Rebroadcast)

dissemination plan in research example

Event: GC Data Conference 2024: Taking Stock of the Evolution of Data Protection in Canada (Rebroadcast)

  • GCLearning newsletter


Winners Advanced Grants competition announced

Studying gangs from the inside

From the epic film The Godfather to news stories

Africa’s rising cities

Africa’s rising cities


Supporting top researchers from anywhere in the world 

  • Science stories

Extra €125 million for the ERC in 2024

ERC President Maria Leptin will take part as a speaker in several sessions of the 9th UN Multi-stakeholder Forum on Science, Technology & Innovation for the Sustainable Development Goals ( STI Foru m ) on 9 and 10 May 2024 in New York City.

ERC at Viva Technology

For the first time, the ERC will take part in VivaTech, an annual technology conference dedicated to innovation and startups held in Paris, France. Together with the CNRS, the ERC will take part in the CNRS Innovation and Prospective Talks – a programme of round-tables bringing together scientists and representatives from the innovation ecosystem.  


The European network of science centres and museums (Ecsite) gathers more than 350 organisations committed to inspiring people with science and technology and enabling dialogue between science and society. 

ESOF - Euroscience open forum 2024

Created in 2004, ESOF is one of the most significant international conferences, having an impact on the science and world transformation. During the event, scientists, entrepreneurs, politicians, journalists and inhabitants are going to discuss the latest scientific achievements, the arts and their impact on society. 

The participation in ESOF2024 is free of charge.

European Congress on Biotechnology

The Congress will be a joint event with the theme “Grand Challenges for Biotechnology: Health; Food Security; and Global Warming” . It will include the 19th International Biotechnology Symposium (IBS2024) , the 19th European Congress on Biotechnology (ECB2024) and the Annual Dutch Biotechnology Meeting (NBC-24) , as well as other highlight events. 

Grant up to 1.5€ million for 5 years For promising early-career researchers with 2 to 7 years experience after PhD

Grant up to 2€ million for 5 years

For promising early-career researchers with 7 to 12 years experience after PhD

Grant up to 2.5€ million for 5 years

For established research leaders with a recognised track record of research achievements

Lump Sum Grant of 150,000€

For ERC grant holders to explore the commercial or societal potential innovation of their ERC frontier research project

Grant up to 10€ million for 6 years

To address ambitious research questions that can only be answered by the coordinated work of a small group of 2-4 principal Investigators

For researchers wishing to work or gain experience in an ERC grantee’s team

Deadline: 17 September 2024

The ERC dashboard is an interactive tool that features data on ERC funded projects and evaluated proposals.

The tool allows users to access project details with the help of filters, to generate statistics and to export data in different formats.  

Dashboard-landing page

The ERC is composed of an independent Scientific Council and an Executive Agency.   

The Scientific Council governs the ERC and is responsible for setting the ERC's scientific strategy.  

It consists of eminent scientists and scholars.  

The ERC Executive Agency (ERCEA) implements the ERC strategy as set by the Scientific Council and oversees the day-to-day grant administration.  



  1. (PDF) On the Dissemination of I.S. Research Findings into Practice

    dissemination plan in research example

  2. Dissemination Plan Template

    dissemination plan in research example

  3. (PDF) D6.2

    dissemination plan in research example

  4. (PDF) Disseminating research findings: What should researchers do? A

    dissemination plan in research example

  5. WelDest Dissemination Plan 2012

    dissemination plan in research example

  6. SOLUTION: Research Dissemination Plan

    dissemination plan in research example


  1. Research dissemination, utilization, copyright and patent

  2. CMD demands comprehensive distribution of the Dialogue report

  3. The Oldest Printed Book: The Diamond Sutra #shorts #facts #book

  4. Celebrate Your Success! The Finished Research Proposal #irfannawaz #phd #researchproposal #tips

  5. Maximizing the Impact of Your Undergraduate Engineering Research

  6. Future Directions in Dissemination and Implementation Research in Health


  1. Dissemination Plan Examples

    Participants also have the option to donate a DNA sample. After a student is enrolled in the project, the student is sent an optional follow-up survey each spring. Given the large number of participants, and rich phenotypic data, we are eager to disseminate the data and project findings in an engaging, innovative manner.

  2. Create a Research Dissemination Plan

    Research Dissemination; Dissemination Plan Examples; Dissemination Plan Template. Dissemination Plan Template; Guide Background; Dissemination Plan Template. What kinds of research findings do you want to share (data, videos, images, etc.)? ...

  3. Ten simple rules for innovative dissemination of research

    Create a dissemination plan. Many funded research projects require a dissemination plan. However, even if not, the formal exercise of creating a plan at the outset that organises dissemination around distinct milestones in the research life cycle will help you to assign roles, structure activities, as well as plan funds to be allocated in your ...

  4. PDF Quick-Start Guide to Dissemination for Practice-Based Research Networks

    Introduction. Dissemination refers to the process of sharing research findings with stakeholders and wider audiences. Dissemination is essential for uptake, and uptake and use of research findings is crucial for the success and sustainability of practice-based research networks (PBRNs) in the long term. Dissemination Planning.

  5. How to disseminate your research

    Principles of good dissemination. Stakeholder engagement: Work out who your primary audience is; engage with them early and keep in touch throughout the project, ideally involving them from the planning of the study to the dissemination of findings. This should create 'pull' for your research i.e. a waiting audience for your outputs.

  6. PDF How to disseminate your research

    How to disseminate your research: Getting your message heard - and used This guide is for researchers who are applying for funding or have research in progress. It is designed to help you to plan your dissemination and give your research every chance of being utilised. What does NIHR mean by dissemination?

  7. Develop your research dissemination plan in seven simple steps

    Brainstorm everyone you need to reach and engage with. This may include your head of department, research funder, policymakers and end users. Prioritise your audiences, identifying those who are key to achieving your goals. Also include anyone you may need to work with or through to reach your key target audience. 3.

  8. PDF Dissemination Toolkit notes

    8. DISSEMINATION PLAN WORKSHEET. be this worksheet to organize your ideas as you read through this document and create dissemination This process will help clarify the dissemination plan and may also. PROJECT in preparing Research DETAILS for funding. Research Partners. DISSEMINATION Target Audience(s) PLAN. Objectives Dissemination Method(s ...

  9. Create a Research Dissemination Plan

    This document provides key strategies for dissemination, including practical advice and specific templates you can adapt for your use. URegina Exchanging Knowledge. A Research Dissemination Toolkit. This toolkit provides a dissemination plan worksheet, tips for effective dissemination, and further resources to aid your dissemination planning.


    completed, working through an initial dissemination plan can help your team focus the project and identify key audiences. When the research results come in, you'll be ready to flesh out key messages, review and finalize the plan, and then implement it. Following is a list of some of the key elements that should be included in a dissemination ...

  11. Dissemination Toolkits

    These toolkits contain guidelines, strategies, checklists, worksheets, templates, examples, and case studies for developing dissemination plans and products. This section contains toolkits that assist with planning for research dissemination and developing a dissemination plan. Developing a dissemination plan will help to facilitate the uptake ...

  12. Disseminating research findings: what should researchers do? A

    Developing a dissemination plan Ottawa: Canadian Health Services Research Foundation. 2004. Economic and Social Research Council. Communications strategy: a step-by-step guide. ... The utilisation of health research in policy-making: concepts, examples and methods of assessment. Health Res Policy Syst. 2003; 1:2. [PMC free article] [Google Scholar]

  13. PDF Dissemination Planning Tool

    Dissemination Planning Tool. Purpose. AHRQ is increasingly interested in research that has "real world" impact in the practice of health care. This tool will help you, the Patient Safety Researcher, develop a plan for disseminating your research findings and products to potential users in the health care system.

  14. How to Create a Research Dissemination Plan

    5. Create your materials. Be the first to add your personal experience. 6. Evaluate your impact. Be the first to add your personal experience. 7. Here's what else to consider. Be the first to ...

  15. Dissemination Planning Tool: Exhibit A

    AHRQ is increasingly interested in research that has "real world" impact in the practice of health care. This tool will help you, the Patient Safety Researcher, develop a plan for disseminating your research findings and products to potential users in the health care system. This tool is designed to prompt your thinking about the processes that you would use to disseminate your findings or ...

  16. Not the last word: dissemination strategies for patient-centred

    INTRODUCTION. The research dissemination process is a crucial aspect of any study, especially research that directly involves the community. (Chen et al., 2010) The knowledge produced through systematic investigations (a) informs the development of knowledge within the scientific field; (b) ensures that the study's methods, analysis, and conclusions are open to scientific and public scrutiny ...

  17. PDF Program Evaluation Toolkit, Module 8: Dissemination Approaches

    Planning. the Timing of Dissemination. Timing will vary: • While the evaluation is in progress. • Before the program ends, for formative purposes. • Immediately following the evaluation, if a finding is time sensitive. • Before next implementation of same program, if there are to be changes. Responsible Party.

  18. Determining the dissemination plan: Internal and external

    Data dissemination. Dissemination refers to making knowledge about your project available and accessible to target audiences 1; this may also be called "contributing to generalizable knowledge," or to what is currently known about a topic. Dissemination is a crucial step in translational knowledge and data utilization.

  19. 21. Qualitative research dissemination

    Ethical responsibility and cultural respectfulness (8 minute read time); Critical considerations (5 minute read time); Informing your dissemination plan (11 minute read time); Final product taking shape (10 minute read time); Content warning: Examples in this chapter contain references to research as a potential tool to stigmatize or oppress vulnerable groups, mistreatment and inequalities ...

  20. Guide Background

    This guide was developed by the Faculty Learning Community (FLC) on Dissemination of Research Findings Using Web-Based Platforms. Offered in the 2015-16 academic year, the members explored various web-based dissemination methods, created and implemented their dissemination plans.

  21. PDF Recommendations for Research Dissemination

    General Recommendations for Research Dissemination. CAPS Community Advisory Board. 1. Create a dissemination plan for all studies. • Include dissemination plan in grants. See Attachment A for sample grant language. • Develop a budget that supports dissemination efforts. This may include translation, printing, mailing and/or community forum ...

  22. (PDF) Strategies for Disseminating Qualitative Research Findings: Three

    Dissemination, as the written or oral representation of research findings, usually happ ens. at the end of a research project (B arnes et al. 2003) and is part of. utilisation - utilisation ...

  23. PDF Sample Dissemination Plan

    Sample Dissemination Plan. This project will serve as a pilot for other courses at the University of ____ and at other colleges and universities throughout the country. The results of our evaluation will be disseminated on the University's web site, which will contain a special page devoted to this NSF-sponsored project.

  24. LibGuides: Systematic Reviews: Dissemination/Publishing

    ISBN: 9780815367444. Publication Date: 2018-05-16. This new book is a 'what and how to' guide to writing for successful scholarly publication in the emerging fields of healthcare improvement and patient safety. While there are many useful authors' aids for scholarly biomedical publication, none focuses explicitly on these relatively new fields.

  25. Developing a Data Management Plan

    "A Data Management Plan (DMP) describing the scientific data expected to be created or gathered in the course of a research project must be submitted to DTIC at the start of each research effort. It is important that DoD researchers document plans for preserving data at the outset, keeping in mind the potential utility of the data for future ...

  26. Develop a dissemination plan for research on diabetes lifestyle

    Dissemination of research on diabetes lifestyle modification treatment plans is crucial for ensuring that the findings reach the intended audience and facilitate the implementation of effective interventions. Here's a detailed dissemination plan addressing the key aspects: Audience and Practice Setting: The primary audience for this research is ...

  27. Research Planning Checklist (DDN2-J10)

    The checklist can be used to include all the necessary component into the research plan. Desired outcome. The structured, well-organised research plan. When to use. Use this job aid at the planning stage of your design research. Pairs well with. Choosing the Right User Research Method (DDN2-J11) Best Practices for Protecting Participant Data ...

  28. Homepage

    The Scientific Council governs the ERC and is responsible for setting the ERC's scientific strategy. It consists of eminent scientists and scholars. The ERC Executive Agency (ERCEA) implements the ERC strategy as set by the Scientific Council and oversees the day-to-day grant administration. Go to ERC President and Scientific Council.

  29. Sustainable development

    Sustainable development is an approach to growth and human development that aims to meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. The aim is to have a society where living conditions and resources meet human needs without undermining planetary integrity. Sustainable development aims to balance the needs of the economy, environment ...

  30. 'Talk' me through TOLD: four key principles for encouraging high…

    The TOLD acronym neatly summarises four key principles for encouraging high quality talk in mathematics lessons to deepen learning. It's fair to say that ' more talk' does not necessarily result in ' more learning for all'. It's the quality of the talk that counts! It's important to create a classroom culture where all voices are ...