Determinants of evidence use in public health policy making: Results from a study across six EU countries

Tradução do Conhecimento e os desafios contemporâneos na área da saúde: uma revisão de escopo

RESUMO A implementação das melhores evidências científicas nos serviços de saúde ainda não ocorre de forma satisfatória. Diante dessa problemática, o objetivo deste estudo foi investigar os desafios da Tradução do Conhecimento (TC) na área da saúde na atualidade. A metodologia desta revisão foi desenvolvida de acordo com os propósitos da revisão de escopo. Para tanto, as palavras-chave ‘translational medical research’ e ‘knowledge translation’ foram consultadas nos bancos de dados de periódicos da PubMed, Scopus e Web of Science. Foram incluídos os estudos publicados a partir do ano de 2008 até abril de 2018. Entre os 1.677 estudos encontrados, 839 artigos eram duplicados, e 818 não atendiam plenamente ao objetivo desta revisão; assim, 20 estudos foram submetidos à apreciação desse escopo. De acordo com as análises dos estudos, o desafio da TC advém de dois fatores: por um lado, a falta de coesão entre a comunidade científica e os tomadores de decisão em saúde; por outro, a inabilidade dos profissionais em traduzir e aplicar novos conhecimentos, além da omissão de apoio e de incentivos das instituições de saúde. Outrossim, esta revisão aborda um corpo significativo de diversos outros aspectos que limitam e/ou dificultam a TC área da saúde.

Using narratives to impact health policy-making: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

There is increased interest in using narratives or storytelling to influence health policies. We aimed to systematically review the evidence on the use of narratives to impact the health policy-making process.

METHODS

Eligible study designs included randomised studies, non-randomised studies, process evaluation studies, economic studies, qualitative studies, stakeholder analyses, policy analyses, and case studies. The MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), WHO Global Health Library, Communication and Mass Media Complete, and Google Scholar databases were searched. We followed standard systematic review methodology for study selection, data abstraction and risk of bias assessment. We synthesised the findings narratively and presented the results stratified according to the following stages of the policy cycle: (1) agenda-setting, (2) policy formulation, (3) policy adoption, (4) policy implementation and (5) policy evaluation. Additionally, we presented the knowledge gaps relevant to using narrative to impact health policy-making.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies met the eligibility criteria, and included case studies (n = 15), participatory action research (n = 1), documentary analysis (n = 1) and biographical method (n = 1). The majority were of very low methodological quality. In addition, none of the studies formally evaluated the effectiveness of the narrative-based interventions. Findings suggest that narratives may have a positive influence when used as inspiration and empowerment tools to stimulate policy inquiries, as educational and awareness tools to initiate policy discussions and gain public support, and as advocacy and lobbying tools to formulate, adopt or implement policy. There is also evidence of undesirable effects of using narratives. In one case study, narrative use led to widespread insurance reimbursement of a therapy for breast cancer that was later proven to be ineffective. Another case study described how the use of narrative inappropriately exaggerated the perceived risk of a procedure, which led to limiting its use and preventing a large number of patients from its benefits. A third case study described how optimistic 'cure' or 'hope' stories of children with cancer were selectively used to raise money for cancer research that ignored the negative realities. The majority of included studies did not provide information on the definition or content of narratives, the theoretical framework underlying the narrative intervention or the possible predictors of the success of narrative interventions.

CONCLUSION

The existing evidence base precludes any robust inferences about the impact of narrative interventions on health policy-making. We discuss the implications of the findings for research and policy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The review protocol is registered in PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews (ID =  CRD42018085011 ).

Factors influencing application of behavioural science evidence by public health decision-makers and practitioners, and implications for practice

The National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in the UK recommends behavioural science evidence underpins public health improvement services. In practice, level of implementation varies. This study is the first to explore factors affecting use of behaviour-specific evidence by public health decision-makers and practitioners for design and delivery of health improvement services. Twenty semi-structured interviews were conducted, along with a review of the commissioning cycle with public health decision-makers and practitioners across a range of health improvement fields (e.g. weight management). Interviews were informed and analysed using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Limited comprehension of behaviour change, challenges identifying specific behaviour change strategies and translating research into practice were prevalent. Local authority processes encouraged uptake of evidence to justify solutions as opposed to evidence-driven decision-making. Some decision-makers perceived research evidence may stifle innovation and overwhelm practitioners. Potential facilitators of research use included: ensuring uptake and implementation of evidence is compulsory within commissioning and its potential to show value for money. A strong belief in local evidence and achieving outcomes were identified as barriers to research evidence uptake. Social and environmental challenges included cultural, political, and workload pressures and journal article accessibility. Embedding behavioural science systematically into public health practice requires changes throughout the public health system; from priorities set by national public health leaders to the way in which relevant evidence is disseminated. Framing factors affecting use of behavioural science evidence using the TDF is helpful for identifying the range of interventions and support needed to affect change.

IeDEA-WHO Research-Policy Collaboration: contributing real-world evidence to HIV progress reporting and guideline development

Partnerships between researchers and policymakers can improve uptake and integration of scientific evidence. This article describes the research-policy partnership between the International epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS (IeDEA) ( www.iedea.org) and the World Health Organization (WHO), which was established in 2014. IeDEA is an international research consortium, which analyses data on almost 2 million people living with HIV under care in routine settings in 46 countries in Asia-Pacific, the Caribbean, Central and South America, North America and sub-Saharan Africa. Five multiregional analyses were identified to inform the WHO on progress towards the second and third 90s of the 90-90-90 targets in adults and children: (i) trends in CD4 cell counts at the start of antiretroviral therapy (ART); (ii) delays from enrolment in HIV care to ART initiation; (iii) the impact of ART guideline changes; (iv) retention in care, mortality and loss to follow-up; and (v) viral suppression within the first 3 years after initiating ART. Results from these analyses were contributed to the 2015 and 2016 WHO global HIV progress reports, will contribute to the 2018 report, and were published in academic journals. The partnership has been mutually beneficial: discussion of WHO policy agendas led to more policy-framed, relevant and timely IeDEA research, and the collaboration provided the WHO with timely access to the latest data from IeDEA, as it was shared prior to peer-review publication.

Applying a logical theory of change for strengthening research uptake in policy: a case study of the Evidence Informed Decision Making Network of the Caribbean

OBJECTIVE

Health policymakers in the Caribbean face challenges with research use in decision-making. Although copious approaches to strengthen evidence-informed policy can be found in the literature, these strategies should be applied and evaluated in specific settings. We developed a theory of change for strengthening research uptake in health policy, and the interventions were implemented as the Evidence Informed Decision Making Network of the Caribbean (EvIDeNCe). We assessed the model's logic and evaluated whether the expected outcome was achieved.

METHODS

The model was mapped in three stages: problem identification; goal determination; and backward linking of interventions. Beneficiaries were surveyed to assess the design logic and to evaluate the main outcome.

RESULTS

A total of 137 respondents completed evaluation questionnaires. The inclusion of evidence briefs, stakeholder dialogues, a research database, and training programs for policymakers in the model was validated. Respondents also reported their intention to act on research evidence to which they were exposed. After respondents had participated in stakeholder dialogues, the mean intention-to-use score was 6.4 on a scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree), and 6.3 on the same scale, after exposure to training.

CONCLUSIONS

This work provides initial validation of EvIDeNCe as a consolidated strategy to strengthen the application of research in policy in the Caribbean. To our knowledge, it is the first study to develop and apply a comprehensive model of this type to the Caribbean. The findings support results from similar initiatives in other countries, but additional work is needed to evaluate the overall impact of the initiative.

Development of measurable indicators to enhance public health evidence-informed policy-making

BACKGROUND

Ensuring health policies are informed by evidence still remains a challenge despite efforts devoted to this aim. Several tools and approaches aimed at fostering evidence-informed policy-making (EIPM) have been developed, yet there is a lack of availability of indicators specifically devoted to assess and support EIPM. The present study aims to overcome this by building a set of measurable indicators for EIPM intended to infer if and to what extent health-related policies are, or are expected to be, evidence-informed for the purposes of policy planning as well as formative and summative evaluations.

METHODS

The indicators for EIPM were developed and validated at international level by means of a two-round internet-based Delphi study conducted within the European project 'REsearch into POlicy to enhance Physical Activity' (REPOPA). A total of 82 researchers and policy-makers from the six European countries (Denmark, Finland, Italy, the Netherlands, Romania, the United Kingdom) involved in the project and international organisations were asked to evaluate the relevance and feasibility of an initial set of 23 indicators developed by REPOPA researchers on the basis of literature and knowledge gathered from the previous phases of the project, and to propose new indicators.

RESULTS

The first Delphi round led to the validation of 14 initial indicators and to the development of 8 additional indicators based on panellists' suggestions; the second round led to the validation of a further 11 indicators, including 6 proposed by panellists, and to the rejection of 6 indicators. A total of 25 indicators were validated, covering EIPM issues related to human resources, documentation, participation and monitoring, and stressing different levels of knowledge exchange and involvement of researchers and other stakeholders in policy development and evaluation.

CONCLUSION

The study overcame the lack of availability of indicators to assess if and to what extent policies are realised in an evidence-informed manner thanks to the active contribution of researchers and policy-makers. These indicators are intended to become a shared resource usable by policy-makers, researchers and other stakeholders, with a crucial impact on fostering the development of policies informed by evidence.

Learning from games: stakeholders' experiences involved in local health policy

Since public health problems are complex and the related policies need to address a wide range of sectors, cross-sectoral collaboration is beneficial. One intervention focusing on stimulating collaboration is a 'policy game'. The focus on specific problems facilitates relationships between the stakeholders and stimulates cross-sectoral policymaking. The present study explores stakeholders' learning experiences with respect to the collaboration process in public health policymaking. This was achieved via their game participation, carried out in real-life stakeholder networks in the Netherlands, Denmark and Romania. The policy game (In2Action) was developed and implemented as a 1-day role-play. The data consisted of: (i) observations and evaluation notes during the game and (ii) participant questionnaire after the game. All three countries showed similar results in learning experience during the collaboration processes in local policymaking. Specific learning experiences were related to: (i) the stakeholder network, (ii) interaction and (iii) relationships. The game also increased participant's understanding of group dynamics and need for a coordinator in policymaking. This exploratory study shows that the game provides participants with learning experiences during the collaboration process in policymaking. Experiencing what is needed to establish cross-sectoral collaboration is a first step towards enhancing knowledge exchange and more effective public health policies.

Contextually tailored interventions can increase evidence-informed policy-making on health-enhancing physical activity: the experiences of two Danish municipalities

BACKGROUND

The present study aims to test out contextually tailored interventions to increase evidence-informed health-enhancing physical activity policy-making in two Danish municipalities.

METHODS

The study was performed as experiments in natural settings. Based on results from a pre-intervention study defining the needs and contexts of the two settings, the interventions were developed based on logical models. The interventions aimed at increasing the use of knowledge in policy-making, primarily via strengthening intersectoral collaboration. The interventions were evaluated via pre-, post- and 12-month follow-up questionnaires and qualitative interviews were carried out prior to the intervention start.

RESULTS

The use of knowledge changed in several ways. In one municipality, the use of stakeholder and target group knowledge increased whereas, in the other municipality, the use of research knowledge increased. In both municipalities, the ability to translate knowledge to local context, the political request and the organisational procedures for use of knowledge increased during the interventions. There was some variation between the two settings, which shows the importance of tailoring to context. Most of the changes were diminished at the 12-month follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Contextually tailored interventions have the potential to increase evidence-informed policy-making on health-enhancing physical activity. However, this finding needs to be tested in larger samples and its sustainability must be strengthened.

Unravelling networks in local public health policymaking in three European countries - a systems analysis

BACKGROUND

Facilitating and enhancing interaction between stakeholders involved in the policymaking process to stimulate collaboration and use of evidence, is important to foster the development of effective Health Enhancing Physical Activity (HEPA) policies. Performing an analysis of real-world policymaking processes will help reveal the complexity of a network of stakeholders. Therefore, the main objectives were to unravel the stakeholder network in the policy process by conducting three systems analyses, and to increase insight into the similarities and differences in the policy processes of these European country cases.

METHODS

A systems analysis of the local HEPA policymaking process was performed in three European countries involved in the 'REsearch into POlicy to enhance Physical Activity' (REPOPA) project, resulting in three schematic models showing the main stakeholders and their relationships. The models were used to compare the systems, focusing on implications with respect to collaboration and use of evidence in local HEPA policymaking. Policy documents and relevant webpages were examined and main stakeholders were interviewed.

RESULTS

The systems analysis in each country identified the main stakeholders involved and their position and relations in the policymaking process. The Netherlands and Denmark were the most similar and both differed most from Romania, especially at the level of accountability of the local public authorities for local HEPA policymaking. The categories of driving forces underlying the relations between stakeholders were formal relations, informal interaction and knowledge exchange.

CONCLUSIONS

A systems analysis providing detailed descriptions of positions and relations in the stakeholder network in local level HEPA policymaking is rather unique in this area. The analyses are useful when a need arises for increased interaction, collaboration and use of knowledge between stakeholders in the local HEPA network, as they provide an overview of the stakeholders involved and their mutual relations. This information can be an important starting point to enhance the uptake of evidence and build more effective public health policies.