Evaluating Evidence Aid as a complex, multicomponent knowledge translation intervention

Abstract

Evidence Aid, an initiative established by members of The Cochrane Collaboration in the aftermath of the Indian Ocean Tsunami in December 2004, celebrates its first 10 years later this year. Whilst the principles of the Evidence Aid initiative are firmly rooted in evidence-based medicine and public health practice, the initiative itself was born of a humanitarian imperative, compassion and the expressed moral duty to help. The evidence-base for Evidence Aid, (that is, for knowledge translation interventions focused on dissemination of evidence), was not, and is not, well-established This article, which is based on a presentation at the Evidence Aid Symposium on 20 September 2014, at Hyderabad, India presents a unifying conceptual framework for use when researching the impact of Evidence Aid as a knowledge translation intervention. It highlights how each of the core activities can be mapped to this framework and identifies key outcomes of interest for evaluation.

Supporting the use of research evidence in decision-making in crisis zones in low- and middle-income countries: a critical interpretive synthesis

“…Multiple [41] 2014 LMICs Man-made and natural disasters Natural disaster, industrial disaster, chemical/biological/radiological/nuclear, conflict, terrorism, civil disturbance, outbreaks, epidemics, pandemics, major transport accidents, generic, multiple, other [42] 2014 India Natural hazard Earthquakes, drought, cyclone, tsunami [43] 2015 Southeast Asia Natural hazard Tsunami [44] 2015 India Natural hazard Flu pandemic [45] 2015 Southeast Asia Natural hazard Tsunami [46] 2015 Pakistan & Haiti Natural hazard Floods, earthquake [47] 2015 Zimbabwe Natural hazard droughts [48] 2015 LMICs Man-made hazard Tsunami, refugee crisis [49] 2015 South Africa Natural hazard Floods, wildfires, droughts, storm waves [50] 2016 East Africa Man-made and natural disasters Conflict, draught, famine, internally displaced person, and refugee crisis [51] 2016 Nepal Natural hazard Lightning strikes, floods, earthquakes and landslides [52] 2016 South Africa Natural hazard Floods, droughts, storm waves and wildfires [53] 2016 LMICs Man-made hazard Fragile and conflict-affected states [54] 2017 LMICs Man-made and natural hazards Armed conflicts and natural disasters [1] 2017 LMICs Man-made hazard Fragile and conflict-affected states [55] options and address implementation considerations. Second, decision-makers need research evidence presented to them alongside other factors that influence their decisions (e.g.…”

“…requires payment, evidence scattered across reports and journals) [31, 34, 35, 39-42, 45, 51, 55] (-) Inadequate strategies used for communication and collaboration among aid workers and researchers to understand and address their knowledge needs [39,40,51,52,55] (-) Inadequate strategies used to share evidence among multi-institutional humanitarian aid organisations and the network of government level stakeholders [1, 38-41, 47, 50, 51, 53, 55] (+) Technology, such as social networking capabilities (e.g. Twitter, LinkedIn), is used to support the sharing of information among the various actors involved in the delivery of humanitarian aid and with researchers addressing the knowledge needs of aid workers [39,51] Strategies aimed at humanitarian aid decision-makers to support evidence use ✓ Use available evidence websites to access systematic reviews and other types of research evidence [1,39,40,51,54,55] ✓ Provide skill-development programmes to enhance aid workers' capacity to understand and use research studies [1,38,47,50] ✓ Build strategic partnerships among aid workers and researchers to ask relevant research questions [38,39,41,47,50] Health research system Governance arrangements • Policy authority: (-) Lack of policy authority to ensure that all personal, organisational and political party-related conflicts of interest are declared in available research evidence by researchers [35,38,41] Financial arrangements • Funds to: (+) Conduct research to fill gaps in existing research evidence in a timely manner (e.g. earmarked funds to conduct research in specific crisis zones to address key knowledge gaps) [1,30,31,34,36,51,54,…”

“…earmarked funds for dissemination of research evidence) [41] Delivery arrangements • Enabling use of evidence: (-) Existing evidence not meeting decision-makers' needs (e.g. lacks implementations considerations for interventions) [1, 33, 35, 38, 40-44, 46-49, 51, 52, 54, 55] (-) Evidence not presented in a concise manner that can be easily understood by non-technical decision-makers [30,31,34,36,38,39,41,43,44,47,51,52] Strategies aimed at research producers to support evidence use To address challenges with stakeholder involvement and given the dynamic environment of crises, it is imperative for health system leaders to invest in building partnerships with key stakeholders involved in the delivery of the health services element of humanitarian aid to improve evidence sharing and use [50,51,53]. One way to build this partnership is by leveraging technology to facilitate evidence-informed discussions among stakeholders.…”

“…For example, in healthcare settings, rapid evidence summaries have emerged as a responsive approach involving the presentation of short summary of evidence from systematic reviews, making them more useful and easier to take in by decision-makers [86]. Rapid evidence summaries can also be useful in the humanitarian aid sector, given the need for evidence to be presented in a concise manner that can be easily understood by non-technical decision-makers in a short time-frame [30,31,34,36,38,39,41,43,44,47,51,52].…”

The governmental health policy-development process for Syrian refugees: an embedded qualitative case studies in Lebanon and Ontario

“…Policymakers raised the issue of inadequate access to systematic reviews in a short-time frame. It is a surprising finding that although evidence websites are available to support this particular issue, they were not brought forward to policymakers as a source for accessing information and/or perceived as helpful (e.g., given the potentially limited applicability of the evidence, and the format of findings from systematic reviews) [37].…”