What factors affect evidence-informed policymaking in public health? Protocol for a systematic review of qualitative evidence using thematic synthesis

被引:21
|
作者
Verboom B. [1 ,2 ]
Montgomery P. [1 ]
Bennett S. [2 ]
机构
[1] University of Oxford, Centre for Evidence-Based Intervention, Department of Social Policy and Intervention, Barnett House, 32 Wellington Square, Oxford
[2] Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Department of International Health, 615 North Wolfe Street, Baltimore, 21205, MD
关键词
Evidence use; Evidence-informed policy; Evidence-to-policy processes; Public health; Public health policy; Qualitative evidence synthesis; Qualitative research;
D O I
10.1186/s13643-016-0240-6
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Claims of and calls for evidence-informed policymaking pervade public health journals and the literature of governments and global health agencies, yet our knowledge of the arrangements most conducive to the appropriate use of evidence is incomplete and fragmented. Designing interventions to encourage evidence use by policymakers requires an understanding of the processes through which officials access, assess and use research, including technical and political factors related to evidence uptake, and the ways in which the policymaking context can affect these processes. This review aims to systematically locate, synthesise and interpret the existing qualitative work on the process of evidence use in public health policymaking, with the aim of producing an empirically derived taxonomy of factors affecting evidence use. Methods/design: This review will include primary qualitative studies that examined the use of research evidence by policymakers to inform decisions about public health. To locate studies, we will search nine bibliographic databases, hand-search nine public health and policy journals and scan the websites of relevant organisations and the reference lists of previous reviews of evidence use in policymaking. Two reviewers will independently screen studies, apply inclusion criteria and appraise the quality of included studies. Data will be coded inductively and analysed using thematic synthesis. An augmented version of the CASP Qualitative Checklist will be used to appraise included studies, and the CERQual tool will be used to assess confidence in the review's findings. The review's results will be presented narratively and in tabular form. Synthesis findings will be summarised as a taxonomy of factors affecting evidence use in public health policymaking. A conceptual framework explaining the relationships between key factors will be proposed. Implications and recommendations for policy, practice and future research will be discussed. Discussion: This review will be the most comprehensive to date to synthesise the qualitative literature on evidence use by public health policymakers and will be the first to apply a formal method of qualitative metasynthesis to this body of evidence. Its results will be useful both to scholars of evidence use and knowledge translation and to decision-makers and academics attempting to influence public health policy. © 2016 Verboom et al.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 1: What is evidence-informed policymaking?
    Andrew D Oxman
    John N Lavis
    Simon Lewin
    Atle Fretheim
    [J]. Health Research Policy and Systems, 7
  • [2] SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 1: What is evidence-informed policymaking?
    Oxman, Andrew D.
    Lavis, John N.
    Lewin, Simon
    Fretheim, Atle
    [J]. HEALTH RESEARCH POLICY AND SYSTEMS, 2009, 7
  • [3] SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 15: Engaging the public in evidence-informed policymaking
    Andrew D Oxman
    Simon Lewin
    John N Lavis
    Atle Fretheim
    [J]. Health Research Policy and Systems, 7
  • [4] SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 15: Engaging the public in evidence-informed policymaking
    Oxman, Andrew D.
    Lewin, Simon
    Lavis, John N.
    Fretheim, Atle
    [J]. HEALTH RESEARCH POLICY AND SYSTEMS, 2009, 7 : 520 - 526
  • [5] Investigating the process of evidence-informed health policymaking in Bangladesh: a systematic review
    Dodd, Madeleine
    Ivers, Rebecca
    Zwi, Anthony B.
    Rahman, Aminur
    Jagnoor, Jagnoor
    [J]. HEALTH POLICY AND PLANNING, 2019, 34 (06) : 469 - 478
  • [6] What is going on in the future for evidence-informed health policymaking in Iran?
    Doshmangir, Leila
    Yazdizadeh, Bahareh
    Sajadi, Haniye Sadat
    Mohtasham, Farideh
    Majdzadeh, Reza
    [J]. JOURNAL OF EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE, 2021, 14 (04) : 285 - 290
  • [7] SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 13: Preparing and using policy briefs to support evidence-informed policymaking
    Lavis, John N.
    Permanand, Govin
    Oxman, Andrew D.
    Lewin, Simon
    Fretheim, Atle
    [J]. HEALTH RESEARCH POLICY AND SYSTEMS, 2009, 7 : 507 - 513
  • [8] SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 13: Preparing and using policy briefs to support evidence-informed policymaking
    John N Lavis
    Govin Permanand
    Andrew D Oxman
    Simon Lewin
    Atle Fretheim
    [J]. Health Research Policy and Systems, 7
  • [9] SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 14: Organising and using policy dialogues to support evidence-informed policymaking
    Lavis, John N.
    Boyko, Jennifer A.
    Oxman, Andrew D.
    Lewin, Simon
    Fretheim, Atle
    [J]. HEALTH RESEARCH POLICY AND SYSTEMS, 2009, 7 : 514 - 519
  • [10] SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 14: Organising and using policy dialogues to support evidence-informed policymaking
    John N Lavis
    Jennifer A Boyko
    Andrew D Oxman
    Simon Lewin
    Atle Fretheim
    [J]. Health Research Policy and Systems, 7