Unique and shared partner priorities for supporting engagement in knowledge mobilization in pediatric pain: a best–worst scaling experiment

Table 4 Health professionals best–worst scaling total counts and scale calculations

Item	Total counts			Scale calculations
Item	Most important	Least important	M − L	sqrt (M/L)	ln (sqrt)	Rescaled
A culture of openness and respect for team members’ perspectives and contributions	123	9	114	3.70	1.31	1.00
Having a shared goal and commitment to the KM activity among team members	125	12	113	3.23	1.17	0.96
Having access to resources to support engagement in KM activities	117	24	93	2.21	0.79	0.83
Fit of the KM activity within the context where the activity will be shared/applied	94	26	68	1.90	0.64	0.79
Having team members with various types of expertise	86	44	42	1.40	0.34	0.69
A collaborative leadership style	48	39	9	1.11	0.10	0.61
Access to a network (e.g. patient/caregiver partner, professional, etc.)	27	73	−46	0.61	−0.50	0.42
A flexible implementation plan	14	84	−70	0.41	−0.90	0.29
Personal knowledge of how to lead or participate in KM processes	28	117	−89	0.49	−0.71	0.35
Presence of a “champion” on a KM team	38	133	−95	0.53	−0.63	0.38
Flexible communication methods within teams	4	143	−139	0.17	−1.79	0.00

Most important = frequency item was selected as most important; Least important = frequency with which item was selected as least important; M-L = most important frequency minus least important frequency; sqrt = square root; M/L = most important frequency divided by the least important frequency; ln = natural log

ISSN: 1478-4505