92
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      How Can We Support the Use of Systematic Reviews in Policymaking?

      discussion
      1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , *
      PLoS Medicine
      Public Library of Science

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          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

          John Lavis discusses how health policymakers and their stakeholders need research evidence, and the best ways evidence can be synthesized and packaged to optimize its use.

          Related collections

          Most cited references17

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

          Changing provider behavior: an overview of systematic reviews of interventions.

          Increasing recognition of the failure to translate research findings into practice has led to greater awareness of the importance of using active dissemination and implementation strategies. Although there is a growing body of research evidence about the effectiveness of different strategies, this is not easily accessible to policy makers and professionals. To identify, appraise, and synthesize systematic reviews of professional educational or quality assurance interventions to improve quality of care. An overview was made of systematic reviews of professional behavior change interventions published between 1966 and 1998. Forty-one reviews were identified covering a wide range of interventions and behaviors. In general, passive approaches are generally ineffective and unlikely to result in behavior change. Most other interventions are effective under some circumstances; none are effective under all circumstances. Promising approaches include educational outreach (for prescribing) and reminders. Multifaceted interventions targeting different barriers to change are more likely to be effective than single interventions. Although the current evidence base is incomplete, it provides valuable insights into the likely effectiveness of different interventions. Future quality improvement or educational activities should be informed by the findings of systematic reviews of professional behavior change interventions.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Effects of policy options for human resources for health: an analysis of systematic reviews.

            Policy makers face challenges to ensure an appropriate supply and distribution of trained health workers and to manage their performance in delivery of services, especially in countries with low and middle incomes. We aimed to identify all available policy options to address human resources for health in such countries, and to assess the effectiveness of these policy options. We searched Medline and Embase from 1979 to September, 2006, the Cochrane Library, and the Human Resources for Health Global Resource Center database. We also searched up to 10 years of archives from five relevant journals, and consulted experts. We included systematic reviews in English which assessed the effects of policy options that could affect the training, distribution, regulation, financing, management, organisation, or performance of health workers. Two reviewers independently assessed each review for eligibility and quality, and systematically extracted data about main effects. We also assessed whether the policy options were equitable in their effects; suitable for scaling up; and applicable to countries with low and middle incomes. 28 of the 759 systematic reviews of effects that we identified were eligible according to our criteria. Of these, only a few included studies from countries with low and middle incomes, and some reviews were of low quality. Most evidence focused on organisational mechanisms for human resources, such as substitution or shifting tasks between different types of health workers, or extension of their roles; performance-enhancing strategies such as quality improvement or continuing education strategies; promotion of teamwork; and changes to workflow. Of all policy options, the use of lay health workers had the greatest proportion of reviews in countries with a range of incomes, from high to low. We have identified a need for more systematic reviews on the effects of policy options to improve human resources for health in countries with low and middle incomes, for assessments of any interventions that policy makers introduce to plan and manage human resources for health, and for other research to aid policy makers in these countries.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Use of research to inform public policymaking.

              To improve health and reduce health inequalities, public policymakers need to find the best solutions to the most burdensome health problems, the best ways to fit these solutions into complex and often overstretched and underresourced health systems, and the best ways to bring about the desired changes in health systems. Systematic reviews can inform public policymaking by providing research-based answers to these questions. Public policymakers can encourage more informed policymaking by asking to see systematic reviews on priority issues, commissioning reviews when none exists, and placing more value on such work in their deliberations and in their interactions with stakeholders. Donors and international agencies can encourage more informed public policymaking by supporting national and regional efforts to undertake reviews and assess their local applicability, and by supporting regional or worldwide efforts to coordinate review and assessment processes.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                PLoS Med
                PLoS
                plosmed
                PLoS Medicine
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, USA )
                1549-1277
                1549-1676
                November 2009
                November 2009
                17 November 2009
                : 6
                : 11
                : e1000141
                Affiliations
                [1 ]McMaster Health Forum, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
                [2 ]Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
                [3 ]Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
                [4 ]Department of Political Science, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
                Author notes

                ICMJE criteria for authorship read and met: JNL. Agree with the manuscript's results and conclusions: JNL. Wrote the first draft of the paper: JNL.

                The Policy Forum allows health policy makers around the world to discuss challenges and opportunities for improving health care in their societies.

                Article
                09-PLME-PF-0446R2
                10.1371/journal.pmed.1000141
                2777391
                19936223
                24ab2542-926f-40d3-8e17-10531c71f49f
                John N. Lavis. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
                History
                Page count
                Pages: 6
                Categories
                Policy Forum
                Evidence-Based Healthcare
                Public Health and Epidemiology/Health Policy

                Medicine
                Medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article