Output-orientated policy engagement: a model for advancing the use of epidemiological evidence in health policy

Health Research Policy and Systems - Tập 21 - Trang 1-11 - 2023
Emily Banks1, Abby Haynes2,3, Ray Lovett1, Uday Narayan Yadav1, Jason Agostino4,5
1National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia
2Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, The University of Sydney and Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, Australia
3School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
4School of Medicine and Psychology, ANU, Canberra, Australia
5National Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation, Canberra, Australia

Tóm tắt

Use of epidemiological research in policy and practice is suboptimal, contributing to significant preventable morbidity and mortality. Barriers to the use of research evidence in policy include lack of research–policy engagement, lack of policy-relevant research, differences in policymaker and researcher practice norms, time constraints, difficulties in coordination, and divergent languages and reward systems. In order to increase policy-relevant research and research uptake, we developed the output-orientated policy engagement (OOPE) model, in Australia. It integrates a foundational approach to engagement with cycles of specific activity focused around selected research outputs. Foundational elements include measures to increase recognition and valuing of policymaker expertise, emphasis on policy uptake, policy awareness of the research group’s work, regular policy engagement and policy-relevant capacity-building. Specific activities include (i) identification of an “output”—usually at draft stage—and program of work which are likely to be of interest to policymakers; (ii) initial engagement focusing on sharing “preview” evidence from this output, with an invitation to provide input into this and to advise on the broader program of work; and (iii) if there is sufficient interest, formation of a researcher–policy-maker partnership to shape and release the output, as well as inform the program of work. This cycle is repeated as the relationship continues and is deepened. As well as supporting policy-informed evidence generation and research-aware policymakers, the output-orientated model has been found to be beneficial in fostering the following: a pragmatic starting place for researchers, in often large and complex policy environments; purposeful and specific engagement, encouraging shared expectations; non-transactional engagement around common evidence needs, whereby researchers are not meeting with policymakers with the expectation of receiving funding; built-in translation; time and resource efficiency; relationship-building; mutual learning; policy-invested researchers and research-invested policy-makers; and tangible policy impacts. A case study outlines how the output-orientated approach supported researcher–policymaker collaboration to generate new evidence regarding Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cardiovascular disease risk and to apply this to national guidelines. Output-orientated policy engagement provides a potentially useful pragmatic model to catalyse and support partnerships between researchers and policymakers, to increase the policy-relevance and application of epidemiological evidence.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Ezzati M, Obermeyer Z, Tzoulaki I, Mayosi BM, Elliott P, Leon DA. Contributions of risk factors and medical care to cardiovascular mortality trends. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2015;12(9):508–30. Banks E, Crouch SR, Korda RJ, Stavreski B, Page K, Thurber KA, et al. Absolute risk of cardiovascular disease events, and blood pressure- and lipid-lowering therapy in Australia. Med J Aust. 2016;204(8):320. Brownson RC, Baker EA, Deshpande AD, Gillespie KN. Evidence-based public health. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2017. Beaglehole R, Bonita R. Public health at the crossroads: achievements and prospects. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2004. Penfield T, Baker MJ, Scoble R, Wykes MC. Assessment, evaluations, and definitions of research impact: a review. Res Eval. 2014;23(1):21–32. Ovseiko PV, Oancea A, Buchan AM. Assessing research impact in academic clinical medicine: a study using research excellence framework pilot impact indicators. BMC Health Serv Res. 2012;12(1):478. Nutley SM, Walter I, Davies HTO. Using evidence: how research can inform public services. Bristol: The Policy Press; 2007. Hallsworth M, Parker S, Rutter J. Policy making in the real world. Evidence and analysis. London: Institute for Government; 2011. Oliver K, Innvar S, Lorenc T, Woodman J, Thomas J. A systematic review of barriers to and facilitators of the use of evidence by policymakers. BMC Health Serv Res. 2014;14(1):2. Malekinejad M, Horvath H, Snyder H, Brindis CD. The discordance between evidence and health policy in the United States: the science of translational research and the critical role of diverse stakeholders. Health Res Policy Syst. 2018;16(1):81. Pappaioanou M, Malison M, Wilkins K, Otto B, Goodman RA, Churchill RE, et al. Strengthening capacity in developing countries for evidence-based public health: the data for decision-making project. Soc Sci Med. 2003;57(10):1925–37. Gollust SE, Seymour JW, Pany MJ, Goss A, Meisel ZF, Grande D. Mutual distrust: perspectives from researchers and policy makers on the research to policy gap in 2013 and recommendations for the future. Inquiry. 2017;54:46958017705465. Davis FG, Peterson CE, Bandiera F, Carter-Pokras O, Brownson RC. How do we more effectively move epidemiology into policy action? Ann Epidemiol. 2012;22(6):413–6. Tseng V. The uses of research in policy and practice Washington, DC: Society for Research in Child Development 2012. Contract No.: 2. Best A, Holmes B. Systems thinking, knowledge and action: towards better models and methods. Evid Policy. 2010;6(2):145–59. Head B, Alford J, editors. Wicked problems: the implications for public management. Presentation to panel on public management in practice, International Research Society for Public Management 12th annual conference; 2008 26–28 March; Brisbane. Petticrew M, Whitehead M, Macintyre SJ, Graham H, Egan M. Evidence for public health policy on inequalities: 1: the reality according to policymakers. J Epidemiol Commun Health. 2004;58(10):811–6. de Goede J, Putters K, van der Grinten T, van Oers HA. Knowledge in process? Exploring barriers between epidemiological research and local health policy development. Health Res Policy Syst. 2010;8(1):26. Brownson RC, Hartge P, Samet JM, Ness RB. From epidemiology to policy: toward more effective practice. Ann Epidemiol. 2010;20(6):409–11. Bach M, Jordan S, Hartung S, Santos-Hövener C, Wright MT. Participatory epidemiology: the contribution of participatory research to epidemiology. Emerg Themes Epidemiol. 2017;14(1):2. Kok MO, Gyapong JO, Wolffers I, Ofori-Adjei D, Ruitenberg J. Which health research gets used and why? An empirical analysis of 30 cases. Health Res Policy Syst. 2016;14(1):36. Richards GW. How research-policy partnerships can benefit government: a win–win for evidence-based policy-making. Can Public Policy. 2017;43(2):165–70. Rycroft-Malone J, Burton CR, Bucknall T, Graham ID, Hutchinson AM, Stacey D. Collaboration and co-production of knowledge in healthcare: opportunities and challenges. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2016;5(4):221–3. Hopkins A, Oliver K, Boaz A, Guillot-Wright S, Cairney P. Are research-policy engagement activities informed by policy theory and evidence? 7 challenges to the UK impact agenda. Policy Design Pract. 2021;4(3):341–56. Caplan N. 2—Communities theory and knowledge utilization. Am Behav Sci. 1979;22(3):459–70. Choi BCK, Pang T, Lin V, Puska P, Sherman G, Goddard M, et al. Can scientists and policy makers work together? J Epidemiol Commun Health. 2005;59(8):632. Feldman PH, Nadash P, Gursen M. Improving communication between researchers and policy makers in long-term care or, researchers are from Mars; policy makers are from Venus. Gerontologist. 2001;41(3):312–21. Cairney P, Oliver K. Evidence-based policymaking is not like evidence-based medicine, so how far should you go to bridge the divide between evidence and policy? Health Res Policy Syst. 2017;15(1):35. Oliver K, Cairney P. The dos and don’ts of influencing policy: a systematic review of advice to academics. Palgrave Commun. 2019;5(1):21. Calabria B, Korda RJ, Lovett RW, Fernando P, Martin T, Malamoo L, et al. Absolute cardiovascular disease risk and lipid-lowering therapy among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians. Med J Aust. 2018;209(1):35–41. Agostino JW, Wong D, Paige E, Wade V, Connell C, Davey ME, et al. Cardiovascular disease risk assessment for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults aged under 35 years: a consensus statement. Med J Aust. 2020;212(9):422–7. Butler DC, Agostino J, Paige E, Korda RJ, Douglas KA, Wade V, et al. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health checks: sociodemographic characteristics and cardiovascular risk factors. Public Health Res Pract. 2022. https://doi.org/10.17061/phrp31012103. Health check templates. Resources to support health checks for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Royal Australian College of General Practitioners. https://www.racgp.org.au/the-racgp/faculties/atsi/guides/2019-mbs-item-715-health-check-templates. Accessed 15 Dec 2022. Ioannidis JP, Greenland S, Hlatky MA, Khoury MJ, Macleod MR, Moher D, et al. Increasing value and reducing waste in research design, conduct, and analysis. Lancet. 2014;383(9912):166–75. Roby DH, Jacobs K, Kertzner AE, Kominski GF. The California health policy research program—supporting policy making through evidence and responsive research. J Health Polit Policy Law. 2014;39(4):887–900. Wehrens R, Bekker M, Bal R. The construction of evidence-based local health policy through partnerships: research infrastructure, process, and context in the Rotterdam “healthy in the city” programme. J Public Health Policy. 2010;31(4):447–60. Rycroft-Malone J, Burton RC, Wilkinson J, Harvey G, McCormack B, Baker R, et al. Collective action for implementation: a realist evaluation of organisational collaboration in healthcare. Implement Sci. 2016;11(1):1–17. Haynes A, Derrick GE, Redman S, Hall WD, Gillespie JA, Chapman S, et al. Identifying trustworthy experts: how do policymakers find and assess public health researchers worth consulting or collaborating with? PLoS ONE. 2012;7(3): e32665. Kothari A, Wathen CN. Integrated knowledge translation: digging deeper, moving forward. J Epidemiol Commun Health. 2017;71(6):619. Yamey G, Feachem R. Evidence-based policymaking in global health—the payoffs and pitfalls. Evid Based Med. 2011;16(4):97–9. Davies H, Nutley S, Walter I. Why “knowledge transfer” is misconceived for applied social research. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2008;13(3):188–90. Bovaird T. Learning about public service co-production when real quality is that which lies beyond language and number. 38th research conference of the association for public policy analysis and management; 4 Nov; Washington, DC. 2016. Haynes A, Garvey K, Davidson S, Milat A. What can policy-makers get out of systems thinking? Policy partners’ experiences of a systems-focused research collaboration in preventive health. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2020;9(2):65–76. Grinyer A. Anticipating the problems of contract social research. Social Research Update; 1999. p.27. Hanney S, Gonzalez-Block M, Buxton M, Kogan M. The utilisation of health research in policy-making: concepts, examples and methods of assessment. Health Research Policy and Systems. 2003. https://doi.org/10.1186/1478-4505-1-2. Lomas J. Using “linkage and exchange” to move research into policy at a Canadian foundation. Health Aff. 2000;19(3):236–40. Jagosh J, Macaulay AC, Pluye P, Salsberg J, Bush PL, Henderson J, et al. Uncovering the benefits of participatory research: implications of a realist review for health research and practice. Milbank Q. 2012;90(2):311–46. Flinders M, Wood M, Cunningham M. The politics of co-production: risks, limits and pollution. Evidence & Policy. 2016;12(2):261–79. Pettigrew A, et al. Co-producing knowledge and the challenges of international collaborative research. In: Pettigrew AM, Whittington R, Melin L, Sánchez-Runde C, van den Bosch F, Ruigrok W, et al., editors. Innovative forms of organizing. Thousand Oaks: SAGE; 2003. p. 352–74. Haynes A, Derrick GE, Chapman S, Redman S, Hall WD, Gillespie J, et al. From “our world” to the “real world”: exploring the views and behaviour of policy-influential Australian public health researchers. Soc Sci Med. 2011;72(7):1047–55. Head BW. Wicked problems in public policy: understanding and responding to complex challenges. London: Palgrave Macmillan; 2022. Spasoff RA. Epidemiologic methods for health policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1999. Mitchell P, Pirkis J, Hall J, Haas M. Partnerships for knowledge exchange in health services research, policy and practice. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2009;14(2):104–11.