New trends in science communication fostering evidence-informed policymaking

This article aims to assess novel trends in science communication relating to how policymakers in the field of innovation and digitalisation policy consume and use scientific findings. We investigate the mutual influence that science communication and policy have on each other and answer the question how emerging science communication trends in the science-policy nexus might influence the use of scientific findings in the policymaking process. By using Google and the largest scholarly repositories, Google Scholar, ResearchGate, and Academia.edu, from 1 st March to 31 st May 2020, we reviewed policy documents and academic literature containing relevant information on the evolution of characteristics of global, European, and national science communication activities and the interrelated policy responses to identify the most relevant current trends in the evidence-to-policy process alongside three key challenges; trust, translation, and timing. The three identified main trends are (1) a stronger engagement between science and policy, (2) more open, reliable, and accountable science communication practices with policymakers, and (3) the increasing digitalisation and visualisation of science communication. We deepened our investigation by conducting online semi-structured interviews with relevant policy stakeholders at the international and national level between 1 st May and 31 st July 2020. With the support of the European Commission and building on the existing network of partners, we identified decision-makers and advisors with relevant experience in fields related to innovation and digitalisation policy working in four countries that represent different levels of generalized social trust: Austria, Italy, Hungary, and the Netherlands, and at the international/European Union level. After an online consultation process with a global set of policymakers, these theoretical findings were translated to policy recommendations showcasing possible solutions in science communication that may be initiated, strengthened, or continued by policy stakeholders in order to reach a more effective and efficient uptake of scientific findings in evidence-informed policymaking.

Amplifying the role of knowledge translation platforms in the COVID-19 pandemic response

The COVID-19 pandemic presents the worst public health crisis in recent history. The response to the COVID-19 pandemic has been challenged by many factors, including scientific uncertainties, scarcity of relevant research, proliferation of misinformation and fake news, poor access to actionable evidence, time constraints, and weak collaborations among relevant stakeholders. Knowledge translation (KT) platforms, composed of organisations, initiatives and networks supporting evidence-informed policy-making, can play an important role in providing relevant and timely evidence to inform pandemic responses and bridge the gap between science, policy, practice and politics. In this Commentary, we highlight the emerging roles of KT platforms in light of the COVID-19 pandemic. We also reflect on the lessons learned from the efforts of a KT platform in a middle-income country to inform decision-making and practice during the COVID-19 pandemic. The lessons learned can be integrated into strengthening the role, structures and mandates of KT platforms as hubs for trustworthy evidence that can inform policies and practice during public health crises and in promoting their integration and institutionalisation within the policy-making processes.

Improving quality for maternal care - a case study from Kerala, India

Background: The implementation of maternal health guidelines remains unsatisfactory, even for simple, well established interventions. In settings where most births occur in health facilities, as is the case in Kerala, India, preventing maternal mortality is linked to quality of care improvements.

Context: Evidence-informed quality standards (QS), including quality statements and measurable structure and process indicators, are one innovative way of tackling the guideline implementation gap. Having adopted a zero tolerance policy to maternal deaths, the Government of Kerala worked in partnership with the Kerala Federation of Obstetricians & Gynaecologists (KFOG) and NICE International to select the clinical topic, develop and initiate implementation of the first clinical QS for reducing maternal mortality in the state.

Description of practice: The NICE QS development framework was adapted to the Kerala context, with local ownership being a key principle. Locally generated evidence identified post-partum haemorrhage as the leading cause of maternal death, and as the key priority for the QS. A multidisciplinary group (including policy-makers, gynaecologists and obstetricians, nurses and administrators) was established. Multi-stakeholder workshops convened by the group ensured that the statements, derived from global and local guidelines, and their corresponding indicators were relevant and acceptable to clinicians and policy-makers in Kerala. Furthermore, it helped identify practical methods for implementing the standards and monitoring outcomes.

Lessons learned: An independent evaluation of the project highlighted the equal importance of a strong evidence-base and an inclusive development process. There is no one-size-fits-all process for QS development; a principle-based approach might be a better guide for countries to adapt global evidence to their local context.

Experiences and attitudes towards evidence-informed policy-making among research and policy stakeholders in the Canadian agri-food public health sector

Policy-makers working at the interface of agri-food and public health often deal with complex and cross-cutting issues that have broad health impacts and socio-economic implications. They have a responsibility to ensure that policy-making based on these issues is accountable and informed by the best available scientific evidence. We conducted a qualitative descriptive study of agri-food public health policy-makers and research and policy analysts in Ontario, Canada, to understand their perspectives on how the policy-making process is currently informed by scientific evidence and how to facilitate this process. Five focus groups of 3-7 participants and five-one-to-one interviews were held in 2012 with participants from federal and provincial government departments and industry organizations in the agri-food public health sector. We conducted a thematic analysis of the focus group and interview transcripts to identify overarching themes. Participants indicated that the following six key principles are necessary to enable and demonstrate evidence-informed policy-making (EIPM) in this sector: (i) establish and clarify the policy objectives and context; (ii) support policy-making with credible scientific evidence from different sources; (iii) integrate scientific evidence with other diverse policy inputs (e.g. economics, local applicability and stakeholder interests); (iv) ensure that scientific evidence is communicated by research and policy stakeholders in relevant and user-friendly formats; (V) create and foster interdisciplinary relationships and networks across research and policy communities; and (VI) enhance organizational capacity and individual skills for EIPM. Ongoing and planned efforts in these areas, a supportive culture, and additional education and training in both research and policy realms are important to facilitate evidence-informed policy-making in this sector. Future research should explore these findings further in other countries and contexts.