Stakeholders' experiences with the evidence aid website to support 'real-time' use of research evidence to inform decision-making in crisis zones: a user testing study

Decision-makers' experiences with rapid evidence summaries to support real-time evidence informed decision-making in crises: a mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

There is a clear need for research evidence to drive policymaking and emergency responses so that lives are saved and resources are not wasted. The need for evidence support for health and humanitarian crisis is even more pertinent because of the time and practical constraints that decision-makers in these settings face. To improve the use of research evidence in policy and practice, it is important to provide evidence resources tailored to the target audience. This study aims to gain real-world insights from decision-makers about how they use evidence summaries to inform real-time decision-making in crisis-settings, and to use our findings to improve the format of evidence summaries.

METHODS

This study used an explanatory sequential mixed method study design. First, we used a survey to identify the views and experiences of those who were directly involved in crisis response in different contexts, and who may or may not have used evidence summaries. Second, we used the insights generated from the survey to help inform qualitative interviews with decision-makers in crisis-settings to derive an in-depth understanding of how they use evidence summaries and their desired format for evidence summaries.

RESULTS

We interviewed 26 decision-makers working in health and humanitarian emergencies. The study identified challenges decision-makers face when trying to find and use research evidence in crises, including insufficient time and increased burden of responsibilities during crises, limited access to reliable internet connection, large volume of data not translated into user friendly summaries, and little information available on preparedness and response measures. Decision-makers preferred the following components in evidence summaries: title, target audience, presentation of key findings in an actionable checklist or infographic format, implementation considerations, assessment of the quality of evidence presented, citation and hyperlink to the full review, funding sources, language of full review, and other sources of information on the topic. Our study developed an evidence summary template with accompanying training material to inform real-time decision-making in crisis-settings.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study provided a deeper understanding of the preferences of decision-makers working in health and humanitarian emergencies about the format of evidence summaries to enable real-time evidence informed decision-making.

Health Emergency and Disaster Risk Management: Five Years into Implementation of the Sendai Framework

The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 recognizes health at the heart of disaster risk management (DRM) at the global policy level. Five years on, it has catalyzed the rapid development of the field of Health Emergency and Disaster Risk Management (Health EDRM) by providing a mandate for building partnerships as well as enhancing scientific research. Key milestones achieved include publication of the World Health Organization’s Health EDRM Framework, development of the WHO Thematic Platform for Health EDRM and the WHO Health EDRM Research Network, and further application of health information principles to DRM. Furthermore, health actors at all levels have continued to engage in the Sendai Framework processes and have had a key role in its implementation and proposed monitoring. There have been significant gains made through the partnership of health and DRM, but the relationship has not been without its challenges. Many national, regional, and global initiatives continue to operate with a lack of consistency and of linkages to respond to the Sendai Framework’s call for embedding health resilience in DRM, and conversely, embedding DRM in health resilience. Overcoming this hurdle is important, and doing so will be a key marker of success of the next 10 years of partnership under the Sendai Framework.