The Use of Research Evidence in Public Health Decision Making Processes: Systematic Review
نویسندگان
چکیده
BACKGROUND The use of research evidence to underpin public health policy is strongly promoted. However, its implementation has not been straightforward. The objectives of this systematic review were to synthesise empirical evidence on the use of research evidence by public health decision makers in settings with universal health care systems. METHODS To locate eligible studies, 13 bibliographic databases were screened, organisational websites were scanned, key informants were contacted and bibliographies of included studies were scrutinised. Two reviewers independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data and assessed methodological quality. Data were synthesised as a narrative review. FINDINGS 18 studies were included: 15 qualitative studies, and three surveys. Their methodological quality was mixed. They were set in a range of country and decision making settings. Study participants included 1063 public health decision makers, 72 researchers, and 174 with overlapping roles. Decision making processes varied widely between settings, and were viewed differently by key players. A range of research evidence was accessed. However, there was no reliable evidence on the extent of its use. Its impact was often indirect, competing with other influences. Barriers to the use of research evidence included: decision makers' perceptions of research evidence; the gulf between researchers and decision makers; the culture of decision making; competing influences on decision making; and practical constraints. Suggested (but largely untested) ways of overcoming these barriers included: research targeted at the needs of decision makers; research clearly highlighting key messages; and capacity building. There was little evidence on the role of research evidence in decision making to reduce inequalities. CONCLUSIONS To more effectively implement research informed public health policy, action is required by decision makers and researchers to address the barriers identified in this systematic review. There is an urgent need for evidence to support the use of research evidence to inform public health decision making to reduce inequalities.
منابع مشابه
System Factors Influencing the Australian Nurses' Evidence-based Clinical Decision Making: A Systematic Review of Recent Studies
Background: There is growing attention to evidence-based practice in Australian clinical contexts and nursing literature. Recent research explores the dimensions of evidence-based practice; however, the implementation of evidence-based clinical decision making has been identified as a cumbersome process. Aim: This study aimed to review the literature syst...
متن کاملClinical decision making in Iranian nurses: systematic review
Introduction: Clinical decision making is one of the most important processes which nurses always use to care for patients. Appropriate decisions help to improve the quality of care, reduce the duration of illness and disability, reduce costs and make optimal use of resources. Therefore, the purpose of this research was to review studies conducted in the field of clinical decision making of Ira...
متن کاملMoving Towards Accountability for Reasonableness – A Systematic Exploration of the Features of Legitimate Healthcare Coverage Decision-Making Processes Using Rare Diseases and Regenerative Therapies as a Case Study
Background The accountability for reasonableness (A4R) framework defines 4 conditions for legitimate healthcare coverage decision processes: Relevance, Publicity, Appeals, and Enforcement. The aim of this study was to reflect on how the diverse features of decision-making processes can be aligned with A4R conditions to guide decisio...
متن کاملDelving Into the Details of Evaluating Public Engagement Initiatives; Comment on “Metrics and Evaluation Tools for Patient Engagement in Healthcare Organization- and System-Level Decision-Making: A Systematic Review”
Initiatives to engage the public in health policy decisions have been widely endorsed and used, yet agreed upon methods for systematically evaluating the effectiveness of these initiatives remain to be developed. Dukhanin, Topazian, and DeCamp have thus developed a useful taxonomy of evaluation criteria derived from a systematic review of published evaluation tools that might serve as the basis...
متن کاملSelecting the acceptance criteria of medicines in the reimbursement list of public health insurance of Iran, using the “Borda”method: a pilot study
Decision-making for medicines to be accepted in Iran’s public health insurance reimbursement list is a complex process and involves factors, which should be considered in applying a coverage for medicine costs. These processes and factors are not wholly assessed, while assessment of these factors is an essential need for getting a transparent and evidence-based approach toward medicine reimburs...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره 6 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2011