Evidence-based information needs of public health workers: a systematized review

Abstract

ObjectiveThis study assessed public health workers’ evidence-based information needs, based on a review of the literature using a systematic search strategy. This study is based on a thesis project conducted as part of the author’s master’s in public health coursework and is considered a systematized review.MethodsFour databases were searched for English-language articles published between 2005 and 2015: PubMed, Web of Science, Library Literature & Information Science Index, and Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts (LISTA). Studies were excluded if there was no primary data collection, the population in the study was not identified as public health workers, “information” was not defined according to specific criteria, or evidence-based information and public health workers were not the major focus. Studies included in the final analysis underwent data extraction, critical appraisal using CASP and STROBE checklists, and thematic analysis.ResultsThirty-three research studies were identified in the search, including twenty-one using quantitative methods and twelve using qualitative methods. Critical appraisal revealed many potential biases, particularly in the validity of research. Thematic analysis revealed five common themes: (1) definition of information needs, (2) current information-seeking behavior and use, (3) definition of evidence-based information, (4) barriers to information needs, and (5) public health–specific issues.ConclusionsRecommendations are given for how librarians can increase the use of evidence-based information in public health research, practice, and policy making. Further research using rigorous methodologies and transparent reporting practices in a wider variety of settings is needed to further evaluate public health workers’ information needs.

Building Capacity for Evidence-Based Public Health: Reconciling the Pulls of Practice and the Push of Research

“…To achieve a stronger practice orientation, besides more consistent evaluation of programs, we need research that better responds to practitioners’ needs and circumstances (e.g., practice-based research networks) (81), funding mechanisms that evaluate natural experiments (26), and reliance on so-called “tacit knowledge” or “colloquial evidence” (pragmatic information based on direct experience and action in practice) (117, 164). Among practitioners, the general concepts and importance of EBPH are well accepted; there is less clarity on the definition of evidence, how to find it, how to use it (7) and how to weight the variations among types or sources of evidence, recognizing that decisions should be based not just on the strength of evidence, but also on the weight of evidence (84). These observations highlight the need for clarity in the criteria for sufficient evidence to catalyze action as well as capacity-building activities for both those sponsoring the intervention and the target organizations and populations.…”

“…For public health practitioners to apply the latest scientific evidence, they need to be connected all along the research production-to-application pipeline, and not just the end of it (7, 81). Research-based evidence serves many public health functions including assuring the public and policymakers of the scientific grounding of advice, selecting EBIs, needs assessment, evaluation, and grant writing (102).…”

Advancing methodology for scoping reviews: recommendations arising from a scoping literature review (SLR) to inform transformation of children and adolescent mental health services.

“…Workload pressures and accessibility of peer reviewed publications are often cited as barriers to uptake of research evidence by commissioners (1,2). In addition to time constraints and accessibility, practitioners may lack the skills to nd, appraise and synthesise relevant evidence (3). The role of evidence-brie ng services and information professionals is to nd evidence relevant to local context and needs, and present them to commissioners as concise, actionable points (4,5).…”

NExT: creating an interdisciplinary alliance to diminish informational barriers for public health nursing

“…lack of systems dedicated to EBP application and dissemination). [12][13][14][15] A 2010 study of PHNs identified needs for resources that are easily navigable and well organised for their specific information needs. 16 According to Krom et al, 17 nurses lack an awareness of electronic databases and how to navigate them effectively.…”