Journal of Medical Systems

, Volume 35, Issue 4, pp 639–646 | Cite as

A Literature Review on Distance Knowledge Exchange in Healthcare Groups: What Can We Learn From the ICT Literature?

  • Mowafa Said Househ
  • Andre Kushniruk
  • Bruce Carleton
  • Denise Cloutier-Fisher
Original Paper


As healthcare groups continue to communicate and collaborate at a distance on knowledge exchange activities, Information and Communication Technology (ICT) has come to play an increasingly important role in supporting such interactions. However, to date, the literature on knowledge exchange appears disconnected from that of ICT. Research on the effects of ICT on knowledge exchange activities is needed. The literature review explores the potential impacts ICTs can have on knowledge exchange groups, and especially, the social interaction process. A discussion of how ICTs could impact the social interaction process of knowledge exchange activities is made.


Knowledge translational knowledge exchange Information and communication technologies Social interactions Literature review Technology Linkage and exchange 



We would like to thank Kerry Patriarche of the School of Health Information Science for editing this document.


  1. 1.
    Ackerman, M. S., Hindus, D., Mainwaring, S. D., and Starr, B., Hanging on the wire: A field study of an audio-only media space. ACM Trans. Hum-Comput. Interact. 4(1):39–66, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Amabile, T. M., Patterson, C., Mueller, J., Wojcik, T., Odomirok, P., Marsh, M., and Kramer, S., Academic-practitioner collaboration in management research: A case of cross-profession collaboration. Acad. Manage. J. 44(2):418–431, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Anson, R., Bostrom, R., and Wayne, B., An experiment assessing group support system and facilitator effects on meeting outcomes. Manage. Sci. 41(2):189–208, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Booth, W. C., Colomb, G. G., and Williams, J. M., The Craft of Research. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2003.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cameron, R., Brown, K. S., and Best, J. A., The dissemination of chronic disease prevention programs: linking science and practice. Can. J. Public Health. 87(Suppl 2):S50–S53, 1996.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Campbell, M., and Uys, P., Identifying success factors of ICT in developing a learning community: Case study Charles Sturt University Campus-Wide Information Systems, 24(1):17–26, 2007.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Canadian Health Services Research Foundation [CHSRF]. (2008). Glossary of knowledge exchange terms as used by the foundation. Ottawa. Retrieved May 20, 2008, from
  8. 8.
    Central West Health Planning Information Network [CWHPIN], A Framework for Evaluating the Utilization of Health Information Products. University of McMaster, Hamilton, 2000.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Danis, C., and Lee, A., Evolution of norms in a newly forming group. In M. F. Costabile & F. Paterno (eds.), Proceedings of IFIP TC13 International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction — INTERACT 2005, pp. 522–535, 2005.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Eveland, J. D., and Bikson, T. K., Work group structure and computer support: A field experiment. ACM Trans. Off. Inf. Sys. 6(4):354–379, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fuhrman, S., Uniting producers and consumers: Challenges in creating and utilizing educational research and development. In: Tomlinson and Tuijnman (Eds.), Education Research and Reform: An International Perspective. US Department of Education, Washington, DC, pp. 133–147, 1994.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Guan, J., Tregonning, S., and Keenan, L., Social interaction and participation: Formative evaluation of online CME modules. J. Contin. Educ. Health Prof. 28(3):172–179, 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Huang, W. W., and Wei, K. K., An empirical investigation of the effects of group support systems (GSS) and task type on group interactions from an influence perspective. J. Manage. Inf. Sys. 17(2):181–206, 2000.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Huberman, M., Linkage between researchers and practitioners: A qualitative study. Am. Educ. Res. J. 27(2):363–391, 1990.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Landry, R., Lamara, M., and Amari, N., Climbing the ladder of research utilization. Sci. Commun. 22:396–422, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Leung, P., Translation of knowledge into practice. In Walcott & Associates, NIDRR national CRP panel final report. Walcott & Associates, Washington, DC, 1992.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lomas, J., Using linkage and exchange to move research into policy at a Canadian foundation: Encouraging partnerships between researchers and policy makers is the goal of a promising new Canadian initiative. Health Aff. 18:236–240, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mark, G., Conventions and commitments in distributed CSCW groups. Comput. Support. Co-op. Work. 11:349–387, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Meyrowitz, J., No Sense of Place: The Effect of Electronic Media on Social Behavior. Oxford University Press, New York, 1985.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Moghnieh, A., and Hernez-Leo, D., Supporting distance learning activities and social interaction: A case study. Eighth IEEE Int. Conf. Adv. Learn. Technol. 2008:801–805, 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Oh, C. H., and Rich, R. F., Explaining use of information in public policymaking. Knowl. Policy. 9(1):33–35, 1996.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Orlikowski, W. J., and Yates, J., Genre repertoire: Norms and forms for work and interaction. Center for Coordination Science Technical Report #166, March 1994. Retrieved March 15, 2006, from, 1994.
  23. 23.
    Patel, V. L., Kaufman, D. R., Allen, V. G., Shortliffe, E. H., Cimino, J. J., and Greenes, R. A., Toward a framework for computer-mediated collaborative design in medical informatics. Methods Inf. Med. 38(3):158–176, 1999.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rich, R., Knowledge creation: Diffusions and utilization. Creation. Diffusion. Utilization. 12(3):319–337, 1991.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rich, R. F., Measuring knowledge utilization: Processes and outcomes. Knowl. Policy: Int. J. Knowl. Transf. Util. 3:11–24, 1997.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Russel, J. M., Scientific communication at the beginning of the twenty-first century. Unesco Int. Soc. Sci. J. 53(168):271–282, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Rynes, S. L., Bartunek, J. M., and Daft, R., Across the great divide: knowledge creation and transfer between practitioners and academics. Acad. Manage. J. 44(2):340–355, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Shortliffe, E. H., Patel, V. L., Cimino, J. J., Barnett, G. O., and Greenes, R. A., A study of collaboration among medical informatics research laboratories. Artif. Intell. Med. 12(2):97–123, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Siegel, J., Dubrovsky, V., Kiesler, S., and McGuire, T. W., Group processes in computer mediated communication. Org. Behav. Human Perform. 37:157–187, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Straus, S., Technology, group process and group outcomes: Testing the connections in computer mediated and face-to face groups. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 12(3):227–266, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sundquist, J., Research brokerage: The weak link. In: Lynn, R. L. (Ed.), Knowledge and Policy: The Uncertain ConnectionNational Academy of Science, Washington, DC, pp. 126–144, 1978.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Teasly, S., and Wolinsky, S., Communication: Scientific collaboration at a distance. Sci. 292(5525):2254–2255, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Varkevisser, C. M., Pathmanathan, I., and Brownlee, A., Designing and Conducting Health Systems Research Projects. Volume I: Proposal Development and Fieldwork. KIT, Amsterdam, 2003.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Yang, C. C., and Ng, T. D., Analyzing content development and visualizing social interactions in web forum. IEEE Intell. Secur. Inf. 2008:25–30, 2008.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Yates, J., and Orlikowski, J. W., Genres of organizational communication: A structurational approach to studying communication and media. Acad. Manage. Acad. Manage. Rev. 17(2):299, 1992.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Yates, J., Orlikowski, W. J., and Rennecker, J., Collaborative genres for collaboration: Genre systems in digital media. Hawaii Int. Conf. Sys. Sci. 6:50–59, 1997.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Zigurs, I., Poole, M. S., and DeSanctis, G., A study of influence in computer-mediated group decision-making. Manage. Inf. Sys. Quarter. 12(4):625–644, 1988.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mowafa Said Househ
    • 1
    • 2
  • Andre Kushniruk
    • 3
  • Bruce Carleton
    • 4
  • Denise Cloutier-Fisher
    • 5
  1. 1.College of Public Health and Health InformaticsKing Saud Bin Abdul Aziz University for Health ScienceRiyadhKingdom of Saudi Arabia
  2. 2.Northern Health AuthorityPrince GeorgeCanada
  3. 3.School of Health Information ScienceUniversity of VictoriaVictoriaCanada
  4. 4.Pharmaceutical Outcomes Programme, Faculty of MedicineBC Children’s HospitalVancouverCanada
  5. 5.Department of GeographyUniversity of VictoriaVictoriaCanada

Personalised recommendations