An assessment of policymakers' engagement initiatives to promote evidence informed health policy making in Nigeria

Individual and institutional capacity-building for evidence-informed health policy-making in Iran: a mix of local and global evidence

Background

Providing valid evidence to policy-makers is a key factor in the development of evidence-informed policy-making (EIPM). This study aims to review interventions used to promote researchers’ and knowledge-producing organizations’ knowledge and skills in the production and translation of evidence to policy-making and explore the interventions at the individual and institutional level in the Iranian health system to strengthen EIPM.

Methods

The study was conducted in two main phases: a systematic review and a qualitative study. First, to conduct the systematic review, the PubMed and Scopus databases were searched. Quality appraisal was done using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklists. Second, semi-structured interviews and document review were used to collect local data. Purposive sampling was used and continued until data saturation. A qualitative content analysis approach was used for data analysis.

Results

From a total of 11,514 retrieved articles, 18 papers were eligible for the analysis. Based on the global evidence, face-to-face training workshops for researchers was the most widely used intervention for strengthening researchers’ capacity regarding EIPM. Target audiences in almost all of the training programmes were researchers. Setting up joint training sessions that helped empower researchers in understanding the needs of health policy-makers had a considerable effect on strengthening EIPM. Based on the local collected evidence, the main interventions for individual and institutional capacity-building were educational and training programmes or courses related to the health system, policy-making and policy analysis, and research cycle management. To implement the individual and institutional interventions, health system planners and authorities and the community were found to have a key role as facilitating factors.

Conclusion

The use of evidence-based interventions for strengthening research centres, such as training health researchers on knowledge translation and tackling institutional barriers that can prevent well-trained researchers from translating their knowledge, as well as the use of mechanisms and networks for effective interactions among policy-makers at the macro and meso (organizational) level and the research centre, will be constructive for individual and institutional capacity-building. The health system needs to strengthen its strategic capacity to facilitate an educational and training culture in order to motivate researchers in producing appropriate evidence for policy-makers.

Assessing the impact of knowledge communication and dissemination strategies targeted at health policy-makers and managers: an overview of systematic reviews

Background

The use of research evidence as an input for health decision-making is a need for most health systems. There are a number of approaches for promoting evidence use at different levels of the health system, but knowledge of their effectiveness is still scarce. The objective of this overview was to evaluate the effectiveness of knowledge communication and dissemination interventions, strategies or approaches targeting policy-makers and health managers.

Methods

This overview of systematic reviews used systematic review methods and was conducted according to a predefined and published protocol. A comprehensive electronic search of 13 databases and a manual search in four websites were conducted. Both published and unpublished reviews in English, Spanish or Portuguese were included. A narrative synthesis was undertaken, and effectiveness statements were developed, informed by the evidence identified.

Results

We included 27 systematic reviews. Three studies included only a communication strategy, while eight only included dissemination strategies, and the remaining 16 included both. None of the selected reviews provided “sufficient evidence” for any of the strategies, while four provided some evidence for three communication and four dissemination strategies. Regarding communication strategies, the use of tailored and targeted messages seemed to successfully lead to changes in the decision-making practices of the target audience. Regarding dissemination strategies, interventions that aimed at improving only the reach of evidence did not have an impact on its use in decisions, while interventions aimed at enhancing users’ ability to use and apply evidence had a positive effect on decision-making processes. Multifaceted dissemination strategies also demonstrated the potential for changing knowledge about evidence but not its implementation in decision-making.

Conclusions

There is limited evidence regarding the effectiveness of interventions targeting health managers and policy-makers, as well as the mechanisms required for achieving impact. More studies are needed that are informed by theoretical frameworks or specific tools and using robust methods, standardized outcome measures and clear descriptions of the interventions. We found that passive communication increased access to evidence but had no effect on uptake. Some evidence indicated that the use of targeted messages, knowledge-brokering and user training was effective in promoting evidence use by managers and policy-makers.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12961-021-00780-4.

Policymakers' Research Capacities, Engagement, and Use of Research in Public Health Policymaking

The use of research in public health policymaking is one of the prerequisites for successfully implemented health policies which have better population health as an outcome. This policy process is influenced by the actors involved under the policy umbrella, with inter-related contextual factors and specific structural and institutional circumstances. Our study investigates how policymakers’ research capacities influence the use of research in the health policy process and identify areas where capacity-building interventions give the most meaning and impact. Furthermore, we investigate policymakers’ research engagement and use this to inform public health policy in the public sector in Denmark. We collect and report data using Seeking, Engaging with, and Evaluation Research (SEER) methodology. Policymakers are reported to have research capacity, but it is questionable how those competences have actually been used in policymaking. Decision-makers were often not aware or did not know about the existing organizational tools and systems for research engagement and use and two third of respondents had not been part of any research activities or had any collaboration with researchers. Overall, research use in public health policymaking and evaluation was limited. As a conclusion, we propose that capacity-building interventions for increasing research use and collaboration in EIPM should be context-oriented, measurable, and sustainable in developing individual and organizational competences.

Health technology assessment in sub-Saharan Africa: a descriptive analysis and narrative synthesis

Background

Countries in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) are moving towards universal health coverage. The process of Health Technology Assessment (HTA) can support decisions relating to benefit package design and service coverage. HTA involves institutional cooperation with agreed methods and procedural standards. We systematically reviewed the literature on policies and capacity building to support HTA institutionalisation in SSA.

Methods

We systematically reviewed the literature by searching major databases (PubMed, Embase, etc.) until June 2019 using terms considering three aspects: HTA; health policy, decision making; and SSA. We quantitatively extracted and descriptively analysed content and conducted a narrative synthesis eliciting themes from the selected literature, which varied in study type and apporach.

Results

Half of the 49 papers identified were primary research studies and mostly qualitative. Five countries were represented in six of ten studies; South Africa, Ghana, Uganda, Cameroon, and Ethiopia. Half of first authors were from SSA. Most informants were policy makers. Five themes emerged: (1) use of HTA; (2) decision-making in HTA; (3) values and criteria for setting priority areas in HTA; (4) involving stakeholders in HTA; and (5) specific examples of progress in HTA in SSA. The first one was the main theme where there was little use of evidence and research in making policy. The awareness of HTA and economic evaluation was low, with inadequate expertise and a lack of local data and tools.

Conclusions

Despite growing interest in HTA in SSA countries, awareness remains low and HTA-related activities are uncoordinated and often disconnected from policy. Further training and skills development are needed, firmly linked to a strategy focusing on strengthening within-country partnerships, particularly among researchers and policy makers. The international community has an important role here by supporting policy- relevant technical assistance, highlighting that sustainable financing demands evidence-based processes for effective resource allocation, and catalysing knowledge-sharing opportunities among countries facing similar challenges.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12962-021-00293-5.

Identifying advocacy strategies, challenges and opportunities for increasing domestic health policy and health systems research funding in Nigeria: Perspectives of researchers and policymakers

Introduction

Poor funding for Health Policy and Systems Research (HPSR) is a major constraint to the development, generation and uptake of HPSR evidence in Low and Middle-Income countries. The study assessed the status of HPSR domestic funding and advocacy strategies for improving HPSR funding in Nigeria. It equally explored the knowledge and perception of the domestic funding status of HPSR and the effect of capacity building on the knowledge of domestic funding for HPSR in Nigeria.

Methods

This was a sub-national study involving policymakers and researchers from Enugu and Ebonyi States in Southeast Nigeria who participated in the sub-national Health Systems Global convening for the African region. A before-after study design (workshop) was utilized. Data collection employed semi-structured questionnaires, group and panel discussions. The workshop facilitated knowledge of HPSR, funding processes, and advocacy strategies for increased domestic funding for HPSR. Pre and immediate post-workshop knowledge assessments were done. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 25 and thematic analysis.

Results

Twenty-six participants were involved in the study. Half were females (50.0%) and 46.2% were aged 35–44 years. Policymakers constituted 23.1% of the participants. Domestic funding for HPSR in Nigeria was adjudged to be grossly inadequate. Identified barriers to domestic funding of HPSR included bureaucratic bottlenecks, political and policy transitions, and corruption. Potential opportunities centered on existing policy documents and emerging private sector willingness to fund health research. Multi-stakeholder advocacy coalitions, continuous advocacy and researcher skill-building on advocacy with active private sector involvement were the strategies proffered by the participants. Pre-workshop, understanding of the meaning of HPSR had the highest mean ratings while knowledge of budgeting processes and use of legal action to enable opportunities for budget advocacy for HPSR funding had the lowest mean ratings. Following the capacity-building workshop, all knowledge and understanding parameters markedly improved (percentage increase of 12.5%–71.0%).

Conclusion

This study found that there was paucity of domestic funding for HPSR in Nigeria alongside poor knowledge of budgeting and advocacy strategies among both policymakers and researchers. We recommend the deployment of these identified strategies and wider national and regional stakeholder engagement towards prioritizing and improving domestic funding for HPSR.

How does the West African Health Organisation (WAHO) contribute to the evidence based decision-making and practice during COVID-19 pandemic in ECOWAS region?

The COVID-19 pandemic required policy makers to make urgent decisions to limit the spread of the disease. International and regional health bodies and research institutions have a role in supporting decision makers and health actors in providing accurate and timely research evidence and guidance in decision making and practice. In ECOWAS region, the West African Health Organisation (WAHO) has experience in promoting evidence use decision making and practice as part of its role as Health Policy and Research Organisation. Promoting the use of evidence to influence policy and practice is possible through various approaches including training, the development of guides and policy briefs, the synthesis and sharing of evidence, and the organisation of meetings to share experiences. In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, WAHO has deployed several approaches to bring the use of evidence to decision-makers and stakeholders to influence policy and practice. To improve practices, WAHO has organized regional training workshops on laboratory diagnostic, surveillance and simulation exercises of outbreak response for key actors, as well as webinars on different aspects of COVID-19 pandemic surveillance, coordination and management. In addition, a synthesis of the most recent evidence and epidemiologic models were developed to enlighten decision makers in selecting and implementation response interventions.

Promoting evidence-informed policymaking through capacity enhancement in implementation research for health researchers and policymakers in Nigeria: A cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Capacity constraints on implementation research among policymakers and researchers are a major challenge to the evidence to policy link. This study was designed to bring together senior policymakers and researchers in Nigeria to consider issues around research-to-policy interface and enhance their capacity on implementation research.

METHODS

The design was a cross-sectional study. A 3-day joint implementation research workshop was held for policymakers and researchers using World Health Organization/TDR Implementation Research Toolkit. Assessment of participants' capacity for evidence-informed policymaking and knowledge on implementation research was done using a 5-point Likert scale questionnaire. A postworkshop key informant interview was also conducted.

RESULTS

A total of 20 researchers and 15 policymakers participated in the study. The interaction/partnership between policymakers and researchers was generally rare in terms of priority-setting process, involvement as coinvestigators, and executing strategies to support policymakers' use of research findings. The mean ratings (MNRs) recorded mostly ranged from 1.80 to 1.89 on the 5-point scale. Researchers were rarely involved in the generation of policy-relevant research that satisfies policymakers' needs with MNR very low at 1.74. The MNRs for capacity to acquire, assess, and adapt research were generally considerably higher among researchers (3.16-3.82) than policymakers (2.27-3.20). There was a general consensus that the training tremendously improved participants' understanding and use of implementation research.

CONCLUSION

Policymakers and researchers are increasingly recognizing their need to work with each other in the interest of the health systems. There is a need to create more capacity enhancement platforms that will facilitate the interface between them.

Using equitable impact sensitive tool (EQUIST) and knowledge translation to promote evidence to policy link in maternal and child health: report of first EQUIST training workshop in Nigeria

The Equitable Impact Sensitive Tool (EQUIST) designed by UNICEF and knowledge translation (KT) are important strategies that can help policymakers to improve equity and evidence-informed policy making in maternal, newborn and child health (MNCH). The purpose of this study was to improve the knowledge and capacity of an MNCH implementation research team (IRT) and policy makers to use EQUIST and KT. A modified “before and after” intervention study design was used in which outcomes were measured on the target participants both before the intervention (workshop) is implemented and after. A 5-point likert scale according to the degree of adequacy was employed. A three -day intensive EQUIST and KT training workshop was organized in Edo State, Nigeria with 45 participants in attendance. Some of the topics covered included: (i) Knowledge translation models, measures & tools; (ii) Policy review, analysis and contextualization; (iii) Policy formulation and legislation process; (iv) EQUIST Overview & Theory of change; (v) EQUIST's situation analysis, scenario analysis and scenario comparison. The pre-workshop mean of understanding of use of KT ranged from 2.02-3.41, while the post-workshop mean ranged from 3.24-4.30. Pre-workshop mean of understanding of use of EQUIST ranged from 1.66-2.41, while the post-workshop mean ranged from 3.56-4.54 on the 5point scale. The percentage increase in mean of KT and EQUIST at the end of the workshop ranged from 8.0%-88.1% and 65.6%-158.4% respectively. Findings of this study suggest that policymakers' and researchers KT and EQUSIT use competence relevant to evidence-informed policymaking can be enhanced through training workshop.