“…Our conceptual framework highlighted the significance of global actors in improving EBDM, one of which could be making such demands from those they fund. 14 As part of funding requirements, trackers for the monitoring of the steps and results involved in research to action should be emphasized, as this will elicit commitment to pursue EBDM. Our KTA framework has shown that it makes no sense for actors to act in silos, even as they must be effective in themselves.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The evidence to policy framework by Mirzoev et al 14 and the Knowledge to Action (KTA) framework were used to conceptually guide the study. Mirzoev et al 14 identified the roles actors such as international agencies, civil societies, and funders can play in scaling up decision making based on evidence.…”
Section: Conceptual Frameworkmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The evidence to policy framework by Mirzoev et al 14 and the Knowledge to Action (KTA) framework were used to conceptually guide the study. Mirzoev et al 14 identified the roles actors such as international agencies, civil societies, and funders can play in scaling up decision making based on evidence. KTA, on the other hand, discusses the procedures for effective use of evidence in governance 15 and argues that knowledge and its processes of production must be an integral part of societies, which they identified as 1) identifying the problem; 2) adapting knowledge to the local context; 3) assessing barriers and facilitators to the use of knowledge; 4) selecting, tailoring, and implementing interventions; 2) monitoring knowledge use; 6) evaluating outcomes; and 7) sustaining knowledge use.…”
Background. Modeled evidence is a proven useful tool for decision makers in making evidence-based policies and plans that will ensure the best possible health system outcomes. Thus, we sought to understand constraints to the use of models in making decisions in Nigeria’s health system and how such constraints can be addressed. Method. We adopted a mixed-methods study for the research and relied on the evidence to policy and Knowledge-to-Action (KTA) frameworks to guide the conceptualization of the study. An online survey was administered to 34 key individuals in health organizations that recognize modeling, which was followed by in-depth interviews with 24 of the 34 key informants. Analysis was done using descriptive analytic methods and thematic arrangements of narratives. Results. Overall, the data revealed poor use of modeled evidence in decision making within the health sector, despite reporting that modeled evidence and modelers are available in Nigeria. However, the disease control agency in Nigeria was reported to be an exception. The complexity of models was a top concern. Thus, suggestions were made to improve communication of models in ways that are easily comprehensible and to improve overall research culture within Nigeria’s health sector. Conclusion. Modeled evidence plays a crucial role in evidence-based health decisions. Therefore, it is imperative to strengthen and sustain in-country capacity to value, produce, interpret, and use modeled evidence for decision making in health. To overcome limitations in the usage of modeled evidence, decision makers, modelers/researchers, and knowledge brokers should forge viable relationships that regard and promote evidence translation. Highlights Despite the use of modeling by Nigeria’s disease control agency in containing the COVID-19 pandemic, modeling remains poorly used in the country’s overall health sector. Although policy makers recognize the importance of evidence in making decisions, there are still pertinent concerns about the poor research culture of policy-making institutions and communication gaps that exist between researchers/modelers and policy makers. Nigeria’s health system can be strengthened by improving the value and usage of scientific evidence generation through conscious efforts to institutionalize research culture in the health sector and bridge gaps between researchers/modelers and decision makers.
“…Our conceptual framework highlighted the significance of global actors in improving EBDM, one of which could be making such demands from those they fund. 14 As part of funding requirements, trackers for the monitoring of the steps and results involved in research to action should be emphasized, as this will elicit commitment to pursue EBDM. Our KTA framework has shown that it makes no sense for actors to act in silos, even as they must be effective in themselves.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The evidence to policy framework by Mirzoev et al 14 and the Knowledge to Action (KTA) framework were used to conceptually guide the study. Mirzoev et al 14 identified the roles actors such as international agencies, civil societies, and funders can play in scaling up decision making based on evidence.…”
Section: Conceptual Frameworkmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The evidence to policy framework by Mirzoev et al 14 and the Knowledge to Action (KTA) framework were used to conceptually guide the study. Mirzoev et al 14 identified the roles actors such as international agencies, civil societies, and funders can play in scaling up decision making based on evidence. KTA, on the other hand, discusses the procedures for effective use of evidence in governance 15 and argues that knowledge and its processes of production must be an integral part of societies, which they identified as 1) identifying the problem; 2) adapting knowledge to the local context; 3) assessing barriers and facilitators to the use of knowledge; 4) selecting, tailoring, and implementing interventions; 2) monitoring knowledge use; 6) evaluating outcomes; and 7) sustaining knowledge use.…”
Background. Modeled evidence is a proven useful tool for decision makers in making evidence-based policies and plans that will ensure the best possible health system outcomes. Thus, we sought to understand constraints to the use of models in making decisions in Nigeria’s health system and how such constraints can be addressed. Method. We adopted a mixed-methods study for the research and relied on the evidence to policy and Knowledge-to-Action (KTA) frameworks to guide the conceptualization of the study. An online survey was administered to 34 key individuals in health organizations that recognize modeling, which was followed by in-depth interviews with 24 of the 34 key informants. Analysis was done using descriptive analytic methods and thematic arrangements of narratives. Results. Overall, the data revealed poor use of modeled evidence in decision making within the health sector, despite reporting that modeled evidence and modelers are available in Nigeria. However, the disease control agency in Nigeria was reported to be an exception. The complexity of models was a top concern. Thus, suggestions were made to improve communication of models in ways that are easily comprehensible and to improve overall research culture within Nigeria’s health sector. Conclusion. Modeled evidence plays a crucial role in evidence-based health decisions. Therefore, it is imperative to strengthen and sustain in-country capacity to value, produce, interpret, and use modeled evidence for decision making in health. To overcome limitations in the usage of modeled evidence, decision makers, modelers/researchers, and knowledge brokers should forge viable relationships that regard and promote evidence translation. Highlights Despite the use of modeling by Nigeria’s disease control agency in containing the COVID-19 pandemic, modeling remains poorly used in the country’s overall health sector. Although policy makers recognize the importance of evidence in making decisions, there are still pertinent concerns about the poor research culture of policy-making institutions and communication gaps that exist between researchers/modelers and policy makers. Nigeria’s health system can be strengthened by improving the value and usage of scientific evidence generation through conscious efforts to institutionalize research culture in the health sector and bridge gaps between researchers/modelers and decision makers.
“…The conceptual framework for the study was adapted from the EVAL-health conceptual framework for assessing the role of evidence in policy development [ 16 ] and the policy analysis triangle by Walt and Gilson [ 17 ]. This framework provides guidance for understanding key influences on the role of evidence in policymaking and guides the analysis of the role of policy actors and context on evidence use to develop the IMNCH strategy (Fig.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“… Fig. 1 Conceptual framework for analysing key influences over policy actors’ preference for and use of evidence in policy development [ 16 ] …”
BackgroundEvidence-informed policymaking has been promoted as a means of ensuring better outcomes. However, what counts as evidence in policymaking lies within a spectrum of expert knowledge and scientifically generated information. Since not all forms of evidence share an equal validity or weighting for policymakers, it is important to understand the key factors that influence their preferences for different types of evidence in policy and strategy development.MethodA retrospective study was carried out at the national level in Nigeria using a case-study approach to examine the Nigerian Integrated Maternal Newborn and Child Health (IMNCH) strategy. Two frameworks were used for conceptualization and data analysis, namely (1) to analyse the role of evidence in policymaking and (2) the policy triangle. They were used to explore the key contextual and participatory influences on choice of evidence in developing the IMNCH strategy. Data was collected through review of relevant national documents and in-depth interviews of purposively selected key policy and strategic decision makers. Thematic analysis was applied to generate information from collected data.ResultsThe breadth of evidence used was wide, ranging from expert opinions to systematic reviews. The choice of different types of evidence was found to overlap across actor categories. Key influences over actors’ choice of evidence were: (1) perceived robustness of evidence – comprehensive, representative, recent, scientifically sound; (2) roles in evidence process, i.e. their degree and level of participation in evidence generation and dissemination, with regards to their role in the policy process; and (3) contextual factors such as global agenda and influence, timeline for strategy development, availability of resources for evidence generation, and lessons learnt from previous unsuccessful policies/plans.ConclusionActors’ preferences for different types of evidence for policy are influenced not only by the characteristics of evidence itself, but on actors’ roles in the evidence process, their power to influence the policy, and the context in which evidence is used.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12961-016-0098-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
