Exploring Criteria for the Translation of Traditional Knowledge Within Contemporary Clinical Practice, Research, Policy, and Education: A Stakeholder Forum

Background: The 2018 Declaration of Astana identifies traditional knowledge (TK) as one of the drivers for strengthening primary health care systems through the use of technology (traditional medicines) and knowledge and capacity building (traditional practitioners). While TK underpins both traditional practice and the use of traditional medicines, facilitating the use of TK in contemporary health care systems has been difficult to achieve. The aim of this study was to identify key factors related to the translation of TK into contemporary settings to help establish tools to support the knowledge translation process. Methods: This study used World Café methodology to collect the observations, ideas, and perspectives of experts who use TK in their practice. These experts (n = 9) were from a variety of contexts, including clinical practice, research, education, policy, and consumer advocacy, participated in the 1-day event. Data were collected into NVivo 12 software and analyzed using inductive-deductive thematic analysis. Results: Thematic analysis identified five themes: The need to define the elements required for critical evaluation of sources of TK as evidence, the importance of applying a tradition-centric lens when translating TK for contemporary use, the need to bridge gaps between TK and its contemporary applications, the value of critically evaluating the TK translation process itself, and the recognition of traditions as living systems. Taken together, the themes showed holistic interpretation of the translation process that incorporates critical analysis of the TK itself and accountable, transparent, and ethical processes of translation that consider safety, socioeconomical and intellectual property impacts of TK in contemporary use. Conclusions: Stakeholders identified TK as a valid and important source of evidence that should guide practice in a range of contemporary settings (e.g., policy and clinical practice), and outlined important consideration for critiquing, evaluating, communicating, and using TK within these settings.