The global stock of research evidence relevant to health systems policymaking
نویسندگان
چکیده
BACKGROUND Policymakers and stakeholders need immediate access to many types of research evidence to make informed decisions about the full range of questions that may arise regarding health systems. METHODS We examined all types of research evidence about governance, financial and delivery arrangements, and implementation strategies within health systems contained in Health Systems Evidence (HSE) (http://www.healthsystemsevidence.org). The research evidence types include evidence briefs for policy, overviews of systematic reviews, systematic reviews of effects, systematic reviews addressing other questions, systematic reviews in progress, systematic reviews being planned, economic evaluations, and health reform and health system descriptions. Specifically, we describe their distribution across health system topics and domains, trends in their production over time, availability of supplemental content in various languages, and the extent to which they focus on low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), as well as (for systematic reviews) their methodological quality and the availability of user-friendly summaries. RESULTS As of July 2013, HSE contained 2,629 systematic reviews of effects (of which 501 are Cochrane reviews), 614 systematic reviews addressing other questions, 283 systematic reviews in progress, 186 systematic reviews being planned, 140 review-derived products (evidence briefs and overviews of systematic reviews), 1,669 economic evaluations, 1,092 health reform descriptions, and 209 health system descriptions. Most systematic reviews address topics related to delivery arrangements (n = 2,663) or implementation strategies (n = 1,653) with far fewer addressing financial (n = 241) or governance arrangements (n = 231). In addition, 2,928 systematic reviews have been quality appraised with moderate AMSTAR ratings found for reviews addressing governance (5.6/11), financial (5.9/11), and delivery (6.3/11) arrangements and implementation strategies (6.5/11); 1,075 systematic reviews have no independently produced user-friendly summary and only 737 systematic reviews have an LMIC focus. Literature searches for half of the systematic reviews (n = 1,584, 49%) were conducted within the last five years. CONCLUSIONS Greater effort needs to focus on assessing whether the current distribution of systematic reviews corresponds to policymakers' and stakeholders' priorities, updating systematic reviews, increasing the quality of systematic reviews, and focusing on LMICs.
منابع مشابه
Enhancing evidence use in public health nutrition policymaking: theoretical insights from a New Zealand case study
BACKGROUND Enhancing the use of evidence in policymaking is critical to addressing the global burden of nutrition-related disease. Whilst the public health nutrition community has embraced evidence-informed policymaking, their approach of defining relevant evidence and evaluating policy has not brought about major shifts in policymaking. This article uses a public health nutrition case study to...
متن کاملSUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 1: What is evidence-informed policymaking?
This article is part of a series written for people responsible for making decisions about health policies and programmes and for those who support these decision makers. In this article, we discuss the following three questions: What is evidence? What is the role of research evidence in informing health policy decisions? What is evidence-informed policymaking? Evidence-informed health policyma...
متن کاملImproving maternal and child health policymaking processes in Nigeria: an assessment of policymakers’ needs, barriers and facilitators of evidence-informed policymaking
BACKGROUND In Nigeria, interest in the evidence-to-policy process is gaining momentum among policymakers involved in maternal, newborn and child health (MNCH). However, numerous gaps exist among policymakers on use of research evidence in policymaking. The objective of this study was to assess the perception of MNCH policymakers regarding their needs and the barriers and facilitators to use of ...
متن کاملEvidence-informed health policy: are we beginning to get there at last?
The long-term challenge of increasing research use in health policymaking Increasing the extent to which health policies are informed by health research has long been the hope, and indeed sometimes the expectation, of those reforming health research systems. Now though, there are grounds for believing that the hopes are increasingly beginning to be turned into realities. This optimism is based ...
متن کاملThe Effects of Global Economic Crisis on Capital Structure: Empirical Evidence from Tehran Stock Exchange (TSE)
Abstract The global economy faces crisis every so often. In recent years, the financial crisis has affected the global economy; all countries, directly or indirectly, are involved. The purpose of this research is to study the impact of the global economic crisis on the capital structure of listed companies in Tehran Stock Exchange. To test this effect, 87 companies listed in Tehran Stock Excha...
متن کاملWhat factors affect evidence-informed policymaking in public health? Protocol for a systematic review of qualitative evidence using thematic synthesis
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 whi...
متن کامل