Evaluation of the performance and achievements of the WHO Evidence-informed Policy Network (EVIPNet) Europe

Lester, Louise; Haby, Michelle M.; Chapman, Evelina; Kuchenmüller, Tanja

doi:10.21203/rs.2.21663/v1

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 30 publications

(44 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Stakeholders should have accurate and up-to-date pictures of evidence so that resources are used in the best possible way 13. Nevertheless, the use of rigorous evidence for both clinical practice and health policy-making is still limited 14–16. The limited budgets make prioritisation a mandatory step for funding agencies; which should be done mainly considering the needed research topics, cost-effectiveness and expected social value 17 18…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mapping Chilean clinical research: a protocol for a scoping review and multiple evidence gap maps

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionClinical research broadly aims to influence decision-making in order to promote appropriate healthcare. Funding agencies should prioritise research projects according to needed research topics, methodological and cost-effectiveness considerations, and expected social value. In Chile, there is no local diagnosis regarding recent clinical research that might inform prioritisation for future research funding. This research aims to comprehensively identify and classify Chilean health research studies, elaborating evidence gap maps for the most burdensome local conditions.Methods and analysisWe will search in electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS and WoS) and perform hand searches to retrieve, identify and classify health research studies conducted in Chile or by authors whose affiliations are based in Chile, from 2000 onwards. We will elaborate evidence matrices for the 20 conditions with the highest burden in Chile (according to the Global Burden of Disease 2019) selected from those defined under the General Regime of the Health Guarantees Act. To elaborate the evidence gap maps, we will consider prioritised interventions and core outcome sets. To identify knowledge gaps and estimate redundant research, we will contrast these gap maps with the available international evidence of high or moderate certainty of evidence, for each specific clinical question. For this purpose, we will search systematic reviews using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.Ethics and disseminationNo ethical approval is required to conduct this project. We will submit our results in both peer-reviewed journals and scientific conferences. We will aim to disseminate our findings through different academic platforms, social media, local press, among others. The final results will be communicated to local funding agencies and government stakeholders.DiscussionWe aim to provide an accurate and up-to-date picture of the research gaps—to be filled by new future findings—and the identification of redundant research, which will constitute relevant information for local decision-makers.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mapping Chilean clinical research: a protocol for a scoping review and multiple evidence gap maps

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Tremendous efforts have been made in these countries to create opportunities for linking research to policy (e.g. [12,[21][22][23][24][25]), which resulted in capacity building to enhance the skills and knowledge of policy-makers and researchers; bringing together communities, researchers, policy, and decision-makers; responding to urgent requests for evidence; and changing the health policymaking culture [26]. Furthermore, in response, some advocacy initiatives are designed to facilitate applying evidence in health policies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Policy options to increase motivation for improving evidence-informed health policy-making in Iran

Sajadi

Majdzadeh

Ehsani‐Chimeh

et al. 2021

Health Res Policy Sys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Current incentive programmes are not sufficient to motivate researchers and policy-makers to use research evidence in policy-making. We conducted a mixed-methods design to identify context-based policy options for strengthening motivations among health researchers and policy-makers to support evidence-informed health policy-making (EIHP) in Iran. Methods This study was conducted in 2019 in two phases. In the first phase, we conducted a scoping review to extract interventions implemented or proposed to strengthen motivations to support EIHP. Additionally, we employed a comparative case study design for reviewing the performance evaluation (PE) processes in Iran and other selected countries to determine the current individual and organizational incentives to encourage EIHP. In the second phase, we developed two policy briefs and then convened two policy dialogues, with 12 and 8 key informants, respectively, where the briefs were discussed. Data were analysed using manifest content analysis in order to propose contextualized policy options. Results The policy options identified to motivate health researchers and policy-makers to support EIHP in Iran were: revising the criteria of academic PE; designing appropriate incentive programmes for nonacademic researchers; developing an indicator for the evaluation of research impact on policy-making or health outcomes; revising the current policies of scientific journals; revising existing funding mechanisms; presenting the knowledge translation plan when submitting a research proposal, as a mandatory condition; encouraging and supporting mechanisms for increasing interactions between policy-makers and researchers; and revising some administrative processes (e.g. managers and staff PEs; selection, appointment, and changing managers and reward mechanisms). Conclusions The current individual or organizational incentives are mainly focused on publications, rather than encouraging researchers and policy-makers to support EIHP. Relying more on incentives that consider the other impacts of research (e.g. impacts on health system and policy, or health outcomes) is recommended. These incentives may encourage individuals and organizations to be more involved in conducting research evidence, resulting in promoting EIHP. Trial registration NA.

show abstract

“…Despite burgeoning interest in this know-do gap, the translation process remains slow, haphazard and unpredictable, resulting in reduced health gains vis-á-vis global investment in research (9). In low-resource, highdisease settings, such as those found in many African countries, the consequences of ineffective KT are amplified, emphasizing the need for health system decision-makers to justify their decisions based on high-quality evidence (10) (11).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Research Knowledge Translation Activities in Africa; An Outlook of the Opportunities and Obstacles

Ogony¹,

Obiero²,

Tukhuwa³

et al. 2021

International Journal of Scientific Advances

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Health systems have failed globally to use research evidence optimally in view of ineffective knowledge translation. Knowledge translation is the effective and timely incorporation of evidence-based information into the practices of health professionals to effect optimal health outcomes. With the growing demands on health care resources and accountability, greater emphasis is being placed on generating knowledge that can have a practical impact on decision making. This review gives an outlook of the opportunities and obstacles to knowledge translation in African context. We searched for articles published in English on the World Health Organization website, peer reviewed articles on Google Scholar, PubMed and Science Direct databases search engines since 2000 in Sub-Saharan Africa A total of 3,020 papers were analyzed and the outcomes reported. The knowledge transfer literature in African countries is widely distributed, problematically diverse and growing. However, significant disparities exist between reports in different countries while there are many settings without published evidence of local knowledge translation. Our review also highlighted the lack of meaningful investment and follow up after research findings. Barriers affecting knowledge translation includes insufficient skills and capacity to conduct knowledge transfer activities, time constraints and a lack of resources. We identified substantial geographical gaps in knowledge translation and evidence that need to boost local research capacities in Africa. Evidence mapping is a useful approach that can assist local decision-making to enhance knowledge transfer into a policy. We recommend the inclusion of knowledge translation advisors who are the advocates of the knowledge translation during protocol development.

show abstract

Evaluation of the performance and achievements of the WHO Evidence-informed Policy Network (EVIPNet) Europe

Cited by 3 publications

References 30 publications

Mapping Chilean clinical research: a protocol for a scoping review and multiple evidence gap maps

Mapping Chilean clinical research: a protocol for a scoping review and multiple evidence gap maps

Policy options to increase motivation for improving evidence-informed health policy-making in Iran

Research Knowledge Translation Activities in Africa; An Outlook of the Opportunities and Obstacles

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About