What is a distinguishing feature of research utilization compared to evidence-based practice?

The distinguishing feature of research utilization compared to evidence-based practice lies in how practice changes are approached. Research utilization typically involves taking research findings and applying them directly to practice, often without incorporating other important elements such as clinical expertise or client preferences. This means that changes in practice may rely heavily or solely on the outcomes of specific studies, rather than adopting a more comprehensive and integrated approach.

In contrast, evidence-based practice encompasses a broader framework that integrates the best available evidence, clinical expertise, and patient values and preferences when making clinical decisions. This holistic approach leads to more individualized care and potentially better outcomes as it acknowledges the importance of context alongside research findings.

The other options highlight elements that are indeed part of evidence-based practice, but not necessarily applicable to research utilization alone. For instance, clinical expertise and client preferences are key components in evidence-based practice, whereas research utilization may not consider these aspects in the same depth. Similarly, systematic reviews can support evidence-based practice by providing a synthesis of research, but they do not uniquely define research utilization.