A comprehensive monitoring and evaluation framework for evidence to policy networks

Building bridges: evaluating policymakers' research capacities, engagement, and utilization in health policymaking within the Kuwaiti context: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Health policymaking is a critical aspect of governmental decision-making that shapes the well-being of populations. In the Middle East and North Africa, particularly in Kuwait, limited attention has been given to exploring the research capacities, engagement, and utilization among health policymakers. This study aims to bridge this gap by investigating how Kuwaiti health policymakers incorporate evidence-based research into the formulation of health-related policies.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study targeted health policymakers in leadership positions within the Kuwait Ministry of Health (MOH). Using the Seeking, Engaging with and Evaluating Research (SEER) questionnaire, participants' capacities, engagement, and use of research were assessed. The targeted sample was all health policymakers in leadership positions, starting from the head of departments and above. The questionnaire comprises four domains, 14 sections, and 50 questions and utilizes Likert and binary scales, with aggregate scores predicting engagement actions and research use. The data were collected between March and July 2023. All the statistical analyses were performed using SPSS v27, and the numerical and categorical variables were analyzed using appropriate statistical tests, including t-tests, ANOVA, and Pearson's correlation.

RESULTS

Out of 205 policymakers, 88 participated (42.9% response rate): predominantly male (51.1%) and married (78.4%). The mean age was 49.84 ± 7.28 years, with a mean MOH tenure of 24.39 ± 6.80 years. Participants demonstrated high value for research (mean score 4.29 ± 0.55) and expressed confidence in the research utilization. Organizational emphasis on research use exhibited nuanced perceptions, identifying areas where MOH support may be lacking. Access to research resources and processes for policy development guidance were highlighted as challenges.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides crucial insights into the research capacities and engagement of Kuwaiti health policymakers. It emphasizes the need for targeted interventions to align individual perceptions with organizational expectations, address confidence disparities, and enhance collaborative efforts. Organizational investments are crucial for fostering a dynamic research ecosystem to improve evidence-based policy development in Kuwait's healthcare landscape.

What is context in knowledge translation? Results of a systematic scoping review

Knowledge Translation (KT) aims to convey novel ideas to relevant stakeholders, motivating their response or action to improve people's health. Initially, the KT literature focused on evidence-based medicine, applying findings from laboratory and clinical research to disease diagnosis and treatment. Since the early 2000s, the scope of KT has expanded to include decision-making with health policy implications.This systematic scoping review aims to assess the evolving knowledge-to-policy concepts, that is, macro-level KT theories, models and frameworks (KT TMFs). While significant attention has been devoted to transferring knowledge to healthcare settings (i.e. implementing health policies, programmes or measures at the meso-level), the definition of 'context' in the realm of health policymaking at the macro-level remains underexplored in the KT literature. This study aims to close the gap.A total of 32 macro-level KT TMFs were identified, with only a limited subset of them offering detailed insights into contextual factors that matter in health policymaking. Notably, the majority of these studies prompt policy changes in low- and middle-income countries and received support from international organisations, the European Union, development agencies or philanthropic entities.

From bench to policy: a critical analysis of models for evidence-informed policymaking in healthcare

Background

The use of research evidence in policy making is a complex and challenging process that has a long history in various fields, especially in healthcare. Different terms and concepts have been used to describe the relationship between research and policy, but they often lack clarity and consensus. To address this gap, several strategies and models have been proposed to facilitate evidence informed policy making and to identify the key factors and mechanisms involved. This study aims to critically review the existing models of evidence informed policy making (EIPM) in healthcare and to assess their strengths and limitations.

Method

A systematic search and review conducted to identify and critically assess EIPM models in healthcare. We searched PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus databases as major electronic databases and applied predefined inclusion criteria to select the models. We also checked the citations of the included models to find other scholars' perspectives. Each model was described and critiqued each model in detail and discussed their features and limitations.

Result

Nine models of EIPM in healthcare were identified. While models had some strengths in comprehension, flexibility and theoretical foundations, analysis also identified limitations including: presupposing rational policymaking; lacking alternatives for time-sensitive situations; not capturing policy complexity; neglecting unintended effects; limited context considerations; inadequate complexity concepts; limited collaboration guidance; and unspecified evidence adaptations.

Conclusion

The reviewed models provide useful frameworks for EIPM but need further improvement to address their limitations. Concepts from sociology of knowledge, change theory and complexity science can enrich the models. Future EIPM models should better account for the complexity of research-policy relationships and provide tailored strategies based on the policy context.

Evidence synthesis to policy: development and implementation of an impact-oriented approach from the Eastern Mediterranean Region

BACKGROUND

Despite the importance of evidence syntheses in informing policymaking, their production and use remain limited in the Eastern Mediterranean region (EMR). There is a lack of empirical research on approaches to promote and use policy-relevant evidence syntheses to inform policymaking processes in the EMR.

OBJECTIVE

This study sought to describe the development of an impact-oriented approach to link evidence synthesis to policy, and its implementation through selected case studies in Lebanon, a middle-income country in the EMR.

METHODS

This study followed a multifaceted and iterative process that included (i) a review of the literature, (ii) input from international experts in evidence synthesis and evidence-informed health policymaking, and (iii) application in a real-world setting (implementation). We describe four selected case studies of implementation. Surveys were used to assess policy briefs, deliberative dialogues, and post-dialogue activities. Additionally, Kingdon's stream theory was adopted to further explain how and why the selected policy issues rose to the decision agenda.

RESULTS

The approach incorporates three interrelated phases: (1) priority setting, (2) evidence synthesis, and (3) uptake. Policy-relevant priorities are generated through formal priority setting exercises, direct requests by policymakers and stakeholders, or a focusing event. Identified priorities are translated into focused questions that can be addressed via evidence synthesis (phase 1). Next, a scoping of the literature is conducted to identify existing evidence syntheses addressing the question of interest. Unless the team identifies relevant, up-to-date and high-quality evidence syntheses, it proceeds to conducting SRs addressing the priority questions of interest (phase 2). Next, the team prepares knowledge translation products (e.g., policy briefs) for undertaking knowledge uptake activities, followed by monitoring and evaluation (phase 3). There are two prerequisites to the application of the approach: enhancing contextual awareness and capacity strengthening. The four case studies illustrate how evidence produced from the suites of activities was used to inform health policies and practices.

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, this is the first study to describe both the development and implementation of an approach to link evidence synthesis to policy in the EMR. We believe the approach will be useful for researchers, knowledge translation platforms, governments, and funders seeking to promote evidence-informed policymaking and practice.

Evidence-Informed Policy-Making: Are We Doing Enough? Comment on "Examining and Contextualizing Approaches to Establish Policy Support Organizations - A Mixed Method Study"

In their study of manifestations of policy support organizations (PSOs), Al Sabahi et al found that PSOs are united in their goal to support evidence-informed policy-making (EIPM), albeit with differing approaches. Their article is an important contribution to the body of research on evidence utilization and implementation. The unprecedented evidence climate presented by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) provides a unique window to motivate EIPM implementation. Research such as Al Sabahi and colleagues must prompt a dialogue regarding how best to address some of the current shortcomings in the field of EIPM. Monitoring and evaluation of best practices in EIPM is scarce. EIPM uptake is unsatisfactory, and the scientific community needs to ask itself why that is and what can be done. And, we should strive to develop a gradient that discerns between the convenient and the essential so countries can evaluate and pursue the policies to best address their greatest pain points through evidence.