Evidence-informed health policy 1 – Synthesis of findings from a multi-method study of organizations that support the use of research evidence
Tóm tắt
Organizations have been established in many countries and internationally to support the use of research evidence by producing clinical practice guidelines, undertaking health technology assessments, and/or directly supporting the use of research evidence in developing health policy on an international, national, and state or provincial level. Learning from these organizations can reduce the need to 'reinvent the wheel' and inform decisions about how best to organize support for such organizations, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We undertook a multi-method study in three phases – a survey, interviews, and case descriptions that drew on site visits – and in each of the second and third phases we focused on a purposive sample of those involved in the previous phase. We used the seven main recommendations that emerged from the advice offered in the interviews to organize much of the synthesis of findings across phases and methods. We used a constant comparative method to identify themes from across phases and methods. Seven recommendations emerged for those involved in establishing or leading organizations that support the use of research evidence in developing health policy: 1) collaborate with other organizations; 2) establish strong links with policymakers and involve stakeholders in the work; 3) be independent and manage conflicts of interest among those involved in the work; 4) build capacity among those working in the organization; 5) use good methods and be transparent in the work; 6) start small, have a clear audience and scope, and address important questions; and 7) be attentive to implementation considerations, even if implementation is not a remit. Four recommendations emerged for the World Health Organization (WHO) and other international organizations and networks: 1) support collaborations among organizations; 2) support local adaptation efforts; 3) mobilize support; and 4) create global public goods. This synthesis of findings from a multi-method study, along with the more detailed findings from each of the three phases of the study (which are reported in the three following articles in the series), provide a strong basis on which researchers, policymakers, international organizations (and networks) like WHO can respond to the growing chorus of voices calling for efforts to support the use of research evidence in developing health policy.
Tài liệu tham khảo
World Health Organization: World Report on Knowledge for Better Health. 2004, Geneva: World Health Organization
World Health Organization: Report from the Ministerial Summit on Health Research: Identify Challenges, Inform Actions, Correct Inequities. 2004, Geneva: World Health Organization
World Health Assembly: Resolution 58.34 on the Ministerial Summit on Health Research. 2005, Geneva: World Health Organization
Antman EM, Lau J, Kupelnick B, Mosteller F, Chalmers TC: A comparison of results of meta-analyses of randomized control trials and recommendations of clinical experts. Treatments for myocardial infarction. Journal of the American Medical Association. 1992, 268: 240-248. 10.1001/jama.268.2.240.
Oxman AD, Guyatt GH: The science of reviewing research. Annals New York Academy of Sciences. 1993, 703: 125-134. 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1993.tb26342.x.
Silagy CA, Stead LF, Lancaster T: Use of systematic reviews in clinical practice guidelines: Case study of smoking cessation. British Medical Journal. 2001, 323: 833-836. 10.1136/bmj.323.7317.833.
Vigna-Taglianti F, Vineis P, Liberati A, Faggiano F: Quality of systematic reviews used in guidelines for oncology practice. Annals of Oncology. 2006, 17: 691-701. 10.1093/annonc/mdl003.
Grol R, Dalhuijsen J, Thomas S, Veld C, Rutten G, Mokkink H: Attributes of clinical guidelines that influence use of guidelines in general practice: Observational study. British Medical Journal. 1998, 317: 858-861.
Bradbury J: Storm over WHO-ISH hypertension guidelines. Lancet. 1999, 353: 563-10.1016/S0140-6736(99)00028-8.
Shaneyfelt TM, Mayo-Smith MF, Rothwangl J: Are guidelines following guidelines?: The methodological quality of clinical practice guidelings in the peer-reviewed medical literature. Journal of American Medical Association. 1999, 281: 1900-1905. 10.1001/jama.281.20.1900.
Grilli R, Magrini N, Penna A, Mura G, Liberati A: Practice guidelines developed by specialty societies: The need for a critical appraisal. Lancet. 2000, 355: 103-106. 10.1016/S0140-6736(99)02171-6.
Horton R: WHO: The casualties and compromises of renewal. Lancet. 2002, 359: 1605-1611. 10.1016/S0140-6736(02)08523-9.
Laing R, Waning B, Gray A, Ford N, 't Hoen E: 25 years of the WHO essential medicines lists: Progress and challenges. Lancet. 2003, 361: 1723-1729. 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)13375-2.
McCarthy M: Critics slam draft WHO report on homoeopathy. Lancet. 2005, 366: 705-706. 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67159-0.
Oxman AD, Lavis JN, Fretheim A: Use of evidence in WHO recommendations. Lancet. 2007, 369: 1883-1889. 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60675-8.
Lavis JN, Posada FB, Haines A, Osei E: Use of research to inform public policymaking. The Lancet. 2004, 364: 1615-1621. 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)17317-0.
Lavis JN, Davies HTO, Oxman AD, Denis J-L, Golden-Biddle K, Ferlie E: Towards systematic reviews that inform health care management and policy-making. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy. 2005, 10: S1:35-S1:48. 10.1258/1355819054308549.
Sheldon TA: Making evidence synthesis more useful for management and policy-making. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy. 2005, 10: S1:1-S1:5. 10.1258/1355819054308521.
Moynihan R, Oxman AD, Lavis JN, Paulsen E: Evidence-Informed Health Policy: Using Research to Make Health Systems Healthier – Report from the Kunnskapssenteret (Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services), No. 1-2008. 2008, Oslo: Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services
Lavis JN, Paulsen EJ, Oxman AD, Moynihan R: Evidence-informed health policy 2 – Survey of organizations that support the use of research evidence. Implementation Science. 2008, 3: 54-10.1186/1748-5908-3-54.
Lavis JN, Oxman AD, Moynihan R, Paulsen EJ: Evidence-informed health policy 3 – Interviews with the directors of organizations that support the use of research evidence. Implementation Science. 2008, 3: 55-10.1186/1748-5908-3-55.
Lavis JN, Moynihan R, Oxman AD, Paulsen EJ: Evidence-informed health policy 4 – Case descriptions of eight organizations that support the use of research evidence. Implementation Science. 2008, 3: 56-10.1186/1748-5908-3-56.
Hamid M, Bustamante-Manaog T, Truong VD, Akkhavong K, Fu H, Ma Y, Zhong X, Salmela R, Panisset U, Pang T: EVIPNet: Translating the spirit of Mexico. Lancet. 2005, 366: 1758-1760. 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67709-4.