Practical lessons for bringing policy-makers on board in sexual and reproductive health research

An Intervention Mapping Study: Developing the Choosing Health digital weight loss and maintenance intervention (Preprint)

Background

Digital health promotion programs tailored to the individual are a potential cost-effective and scalable solution to enable self-management and provide support to people with excess body weight. However, solutions that are widely accessible, personalized, and theory- and evidence-based are still limited.

Objective

This study aimed to develop a digital behavior change program, Choosing Health, that could identify modifiable predictors of weight loss and maintenance for each individual and use these to provide tailored support.

Methods

We applied an Intervention Mapping protocol to design the program. This systematic approach to develop theory- and evidence-based health promotion programs consisted of 6 steps: development of a logic model of the problem, a model of change, intervention design and intervention production, the implementation plan, and the evaluation plan. The decisions made during the Intervention Mapping process were guided by theory, existing evidence, and our own research—including 4 focus groups (n=40), expert consultations (n=12), and interviews (n=11). The stakeholders included researchers, public representatives (including individuals with overweight and obesity), and experts from a variety of relevant backgrounds (including nutrition, physical activity, and the health care sector).

Results

Following a structured process, we developed a tailored intervention that has the potential to reduce excess body weight and support behavior changes in people with overweight and obesity. The Choosing Health intervention consists of tailored, personalized text messages and email support that correspond with theoretical domains potentially predictive of weight outcomes for each participant. The intervention content includes behavior change techniques to support motivation maintenance, self-regulation, habit formation, environmental restructuring, social support, and addressing physical and psychological resources.

Conclusions

The use of an Intervention Mapping protocol enabled the systematic development of the Choosing Health intervention and guided the implementation and evaluation of the program. Through the involvement of different stakeholders, including representatives of the general public, we were able to map out program facilitators and barriers while increasing the ecological validity of the program to ensure that we build an intervention that is useful, user-friendly, and informative. We also summarized the lessons learned for the Choosing Health intervention development and for other health promotion programs.

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2020-040183

Evidence map of knowledge translation strategies, outcomes, facilitators and barriers in African health systems

BACKGROUND

The need for research-based knowledge to inform health policy formulation and implementation is a chronic global concern impacting health systems functioning and impeding the provision of quality healthcare for all. This paper provides a systematic overview of the literature on knowledge translation (KT) strategies employed by health system researchers and policy-makers in African countries.

METHODS

Evidence mapping methodology was adapted from the social and health sciences literature and used to generate a schema of KT strategies, outcomes, facilitators and barriers. Four reference databases were searched using defined criteria. Studies were screened and a searchable database containing 62 eligible studies was compiled using Microsoft Access. Frequency and thematic analysis were used to report study characteristics and to establish the final evidence map. Focus was placed on KT in policy formulation processes in order to better manage the diversity of available literature.

RESULTS

The KT literature in African countries is widely distributed, problematically diverse and growing. Significant disparities exist between reports on KT in different countries, and there are many settings without published evidence of local KT characteristics. Commonly reported KT strategies include policy briefs, capacity-building workshops and policy dialogues. Barriers affecting researchers and policy-makers include insufficient skills and capacity to conduct KT activities, time constraints and a lack of resources. Availability of quality locally relevant research was the most reported facilitator. Limited KT outcomes reflect persisting difficulties in outcome identification and reporting.

CONCLUSION

This study has identified substantial geographical gaps in knowledge and evidenced the need to boost local research capacities on KT practices in low- and middle-income countries. Evidence mapping is also shown to be a useful approach that can assist local decision-making to enhance KT in policy and practice.

Opportunities for linking research to policy: lessons learned from implementation research in sexual and reproductive health within the ANSER network

Background

The uptake of findings from sexual and reproductive health and rights research into policy-making remains a complex and non-linear process. Different models of research utilisation and guidelines to maximise this in policy-making exist, however, challenges still remain for researchers to improve uptake of their research findings and for policy-makers to use research evidence in their work.

Methods

A participatory workshop with researchers was organised in November 2017 by the Academic Network for Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights Policy (ANSER) to address this gap. ANSER is a consortium of experienced researchers, some of whom have policy-making experience, working on sexual and reproductive health and rights issues across 16 countries and 5 continents. The experiential learning cycle was used to guide the workshop discussions based on case studies and to encourage participants to focus on key lessons learned. Workshop findings were thematically analysed using specific stages from Hanney et al.’s (Health Res Policy Syst 1:2, 2003) framework on the place of policy-making in the stages of assessment of research utilisation and outcomes.

Results

The workshop identified key strategies for translating research into policy, including joint agenda-setting between researchers and policy-makers, as well as building trust and partnerships with different stakeholders. These were linked to stages within Hanney et al.’s framework as opportunities for engaging with policy-makers to ensure uptake of research findings.

Conclusion

The engagement of stakeholders during the research development and implementation phases, especially at strategic moments, has a positive impact on uptake of research findings. The strategies and stages described in this paper can be applied to improve utilisation of research findings into policy development and implementation globally.