23
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Embedding implementation research to enhance health policy and systems: a multi-country analysis from ten settings in Latin America and the Caribbean

      research-article

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Progress towards universal health coverage requires health policies and systems that are informed by contextualised and actionable research. Many challenges impede the uptake of evidence to enhance health policy implementation and the coverage, quality, efficiency and equity of health systems. To address this need, we developed an innovative model of implementation research embedded in real-world policy and programme cycles and led directly by policy-makers and health systems decision-makers. The approach was tested in ten settings in Latin America and the Caribbean, supported under a common funding and capacity strengthening initiative. The present study aims to analyse ten embedded implementation research projects in order to identify barriers and facilitators to embedding research into policy and practice as well as to assess the programme, policy and systems improvements and the cross-cutting lessons in conducting research embedded in real-world policy and systems decision-making.

          Methods

          The multi-country analysis is based on the triangulation of data collected via three methods, namely (1) document review, (2) an electronic questionnaire and (3) in-depth interviews with decision-makers. Data from the document review was charted and narratively synthesised. Data from the questionnaire was used to assess three characteristics of the decision-maker’s participation in embedded research, namely (1) level of engagement in different stages of research; (2) extent to which their capacities to conduct and use research were developed; and (3) the level of confidence in undertaking implementation research activities. Interview data was analysed using a thematic approach.

          Results

          The main barriers to effective delivery or scale-up of health interventions identified in the research projects were inadequate financing, fragmentation of healthcare services and information systems, limited capacity of health system stakeholders, insufficient time, cultural factors, and a lack of information. Decision-makers’ experience in embedded research showed strong engagement in protocol development, moderate engagement in data collection and low engagement in data analysis. The in-depth interviews identified 17 facilitators and 8 barriers to embedding research into policy and systems. The principal facilitating factors were actionability of findings, relevance of research and engagement of decision-makers, whereas the main barriers were time and political processes. In Argentina, the research led to the development of new monitoring indicators to improve the implementation of the perinatal health policy, while in Chile, empirical findings supported the establishment of a training programme on reproductive rights, targeted to municipal health facilities.

          Conclusions

          This multi-country analysis contributes to the evidence base for the embedded research approach to support health policy and systems decisions-making. Embedding research into policy and practice stimulates the relevance and applicability of research, while promoting decision-makers’ engagement and likelihood to use research evidence in policy-making and health systems strengthening.

          Related collections

          Most cited references31

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A systematic review of stakeholder engagement in comparative effectiveness and patient-centered outcomes research.

          We conducted a review of the peer-reviewed literature since 2003 to catalogue reported methods of stakeholder engagement in comparative effectiveness research and patient-centered outcomes research.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            New directions in evidence-based policy research: a critical analysis of the literature

            Despite 40 years of research into evidence-based policy (EBP) and a continued drive from both policymakers and researchers to increase research uptake in policy, barriers to the use of evidence are persistently identified in the literature. However, it is not clear what explains this persistence – whether they represent real factors, or if they are artefacts of approaches used to study EBP. Based on an updated review, this paper analyses this literature to explain persistent barriers and facilitators. We critically describe the literature in terms of its theoretical underpinnings, definitions of ‘evidence’, methods, and underlying assumptions of research in the field, and aim to illuminate the EBP discourse by comparison with approaches from other fields. Much of the research in this area is theoretically naive, focusing primarily on the uptake of research evidence as opposed to evidence defined more broadly, and privileging academics’ research priorities over those of policymakers. Little empirical data analysing the processes or impact of evidence use in policy is available to inform researchers or decision-makers. EBP research often assumes that policymakers do not use evidence and that more evidence – meaning research evidence – use would benefit policymakers and populations. We argue that these assumptions are unsupported, biasing much of EBP research. The agenda of ‘getting evidence into policy’ has side-lined the empirical description and analysis of how research and policy actually interact in vivo. Rather than asking how research evidence can be made more influential, academics should aim to understand what influences and constitutes policy, and produce more critically and theoretically informed studies of decision-making. We question the main assumptions made by EBP researchers, explore the implications of doing so, and propose new directions for EBP research, and health policy.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Stakeholder participation in comparative effectiveness research: defining a framework for effective engagement.

              AIMS: Stakeholder engagement is fundamental to comparative effectiveness research (CER), but lacks consistent terminology. This paper aims to define stakeholder engagement and present a conceptual model for involving stakeholders in CER. MATERIALS #ENTITYSTARTX00026; METHODS: The definitions and model were developed from a literature search, expert input and experience with the Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research in Cancer Genomics, a proof-of-concept platform for stakeholder involvement in priority setting and CER study design. RESULTS: Definitions for stakeholder and stakeholder engagement reflect the target constituencies and their role in CER. The 'analytic-deliberative' conceptual model for stakeholder engagement illustrates the inputs, methods and outputs relevant to CER. The model differentiates methods at each stage of the project; depicts the relationship between components; and identifies outcome measures for evaluation of the process. CONCLUSION: While the definitions and model require testing before being broadly adopted, they are an important foundational step and will be useful for investigators, funders and stakeholder groups interested in contributing to CER.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                langloise@who.int
                amancuso@who.int
                eliasvan@paho.org
                reveizl@paho.org
                Journal
                Health Res Policy Syst
                Health Res Policy Syst
                Health Research Policy and Systems
                BioMed Central (London )
                1478-4505
                15 October 2019
                15 October 2019
                2019
                : 17
                : 85
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000000121633745, GRID grid.3575.4, Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research, Science Division, , World Health Organization (WHO), ; 20 Avenue Appia, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0001 0505 4321, GRID grid.4437.4, Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), ; 525 23rd Street NW, Washington, DC United States of America
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4853-2511
                Article
                484
                10.1186/s12961-019-0484-4
                6794825
                31615511
                eb944ad7-ab26-404f-8a1e-da391fc7d8c7
                © The Author(s). 2019

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 8 March 2019
                : 3 September 2019
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2019

                Health & Social care
                implementation research,co-production,embedding research,health systems research,universal health coverage,policy-making,maternal health,engagement,health systems strengthening

                Comments

                Comment on this article