HighlightsMedia attitude towards underpinning policy with evidence influences policy decision makers.Individual skills, attitudes, values of policy makers impact the extent evidence use.A solid research infrastructure is facilitating but not sufficient for evidence use.Factors that impact evidence use in policy making differ by country and policy context.Interventions connecting policy makers and researchers in the policy context seem most promising.

BackgroundEnsuring health policies are informed by evidence still remains a challenge despite efforts devoted to this aim. Several tools and approaches aimed at fostering evidence-informed policy-making (EIPM) have been developed, yet there is a lack of availability of indicators specifically devoted to assess and support EIPM. The present study aims to overcome this by building a set of measurable indicators for EIPM intended to infer if and to what extent health-related policies are, or are expected to be, evidence-informed for the purposes of policy planning as well as formative and summative evaluations.MethodsThe indicators for EIPM were developed and validated at international level by means of a two-round internet-based Delphi study conducted within the European project ‘REsearch into POlicy to enhance Physical Activity’ (REPOPA). A total of 82 researchers and policy-makers from the six European countries (Denmark, Finland, Italy, the Netherlands, Romania, the United Kingdom) involved in the project and international organisations were asked to evaluate the relevance and feasibility of an initial set of 23 indicators developed by REPOPA researchers on the basis of literature and knowledge gathered from the previous phases of the project, and to propose new indicators.ResultsThe first Delphi round led to the validation of 14 initial indicators and to the development of 8 additional indicators based on panellists’ suggestions; the second round led to the validation of a further 11 indicators, including 6 proposed by panellists, and to the rejection of 6 indicators. A total of 25 indicators were validated, covering EIPM issues related to human resources, documentation, participation and monitoring, and stressing different levels of knowledge exchange and involvement of researchers and other stakeholders in policy development and evaluation.ConclusionThe study overcame the lack of availability of indicators to assess if and to what extent policies are realised in an evidence-informed manner thanks to the active contribution of researchers and policy-makers. These indicators are intended to become a shared resource usable by policy-makers, researchers and other stakeholders, with a crucial impact on fostering the development of policies informed by evidence.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12961-018-0323-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundFacilitating and enhancing interaction between stakeholders involved in the policymaking process to stimulate collaboration and use of evidence, is important to foster the development of effective Health Enhancing Physical Activity (HEPA) policies. Performing an analysis of real-world policymaking processes will help reveal the complexity of a network of stakeholders. Therefore, the main objectives were to unravel the stakeholder network in the policy process by conducting three systems analyses, and to increase insight into the similarities and differences in the policy processes of these European country cases.MethodsA systems analysis of the local HEPA policymaking process was performed in three European countries involved in the ‘REsearch into POlicy to enhance Physical Activity’ (REPOPA) project, resulting in three schematic models showing the main stakeholders and their relationships. The models were used to compare the systems, focusing on implications with respect to collaboration and use of evidence in local HEPA policymaking. Policy documents and relevant webpages were examined and main stakeholders were interviewed.ResultsThe systems analysis in each country identified the main stakeholders involved and their position and relations in the policymaking process. The Netherlands and Denmark were the most similar and both differed most from Romania, especially at the level of accountability of the local public authorities for local HEPA policymaking. The categories of driving forces underlying the relations between stakeholders were formal relations, informal interaction and knowledge exchange.ConclusionsA systems analysis providing detailed descriptions of positions and relations in the stakeholder network in local level HEPA policymaking is rather unique in this area. The analyses are useful when a need arises for increased interaction, collaboration and use of knowledge between stakeholders in the local HEPA network, as they provide an overview of the stakeholders involved and their mutual relations. This information can be an important starting point to enhance the uptake of evidence and build more effective public health policies.

BackgroundOne of the key elements to enhance the uptake of evidence in public health policies is stimulating cross-sector collaboration. An intervention stimulating collaboration is a policy game. The aim of this study was to describe the design and methods of the development process of the policy game ‘In2Action’ within a real-life setting of public health policymaking networks in the Netherlands, Denmark and Romania.MethodsThe development of the policy game intervention consisted of three phases, pre intervention, designing the game intervention and tailoring the intervention.ResultsIn2Action was developed as a role-play game of one day, with main focus to develop in collaboration a cross-sector implementation plan based on the approved strategic local public health policy.ConclusionsThis study introduced an innovative intervention for public health policymaking. It described the design and development of the generic frame of the In2Action game focusing on enhancing collaboration in local public health policymaking networks. By keeping the game generic, it became suitable for each of the three country cases with only minor changes. The generic frame of the game is expected to be generalizable for other European countries to stimulate interaction and collaboration in the policy process.

Since public health problems are complex and the related policies need to address a wide range of sectors, cross-sectoral collaboration is beneficial. One intervention focusing on stimulating collaboration is a 'policy game'. The focus on specific problems facilitates relationships between the stakeholders and stimulates cross-sectoral policymaking. The present study explores stakeholders' learning experiences with respect to the collaboration process in public health policymaking. This was achieved via their game participation, carried out in real-life stakeholder networks in the Netherlands, Denmark and Romania. The policy game (In2Action) was developed and implemented as a 1-day role-play. The data consisted of: (i) observations and evaluation notes during the game and (ii) participant questionnaire after the game. All three countries showed similar results in learning experience during the collaboration processes in local policymaking. Specific learning experiences were related to: (i) the stakeholder network, (ii) interaction and (iii) relationships. The game also increased participant's understanding of group dynamics and need for a coordinator in policymaking. This exploratory study shows that the game provides participants with learning experiences during the collaboration process in policymaking. Experiencing what is needed to establish cross-sectoral collaboration is a first step towards enhancing knowledge exchange and more effective public health policies.