Evidence-informed health policy - the crucial role of advocacy

Field, Penelope; Gauld, Robin; Lawrence, Mark

doi:10.1111/j.1742-1241.2012.02883.x

Cited by 13 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 20 publications

(22 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These issues may include constituents’ needs or opinions, evidence of acceptability or feasibility, health impact, personal interest, local leaders, socio-political considerations, the political dynamics affecting the process, evidence of scientific effectiveness, and efforts of advocacy groups. 9–11 Even though the role of research evidence is one of many influences in this complex policy process, 12 use of such evidence is important because its use can inform policy decisions that will improve public health.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accessing evidence to inform public health policy: a study to enhance advocacy

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Improving population health often involves policy changes that are the result of complex advocacy efforts. Information exchanges among researchers, advocates, and policymakers is paramount to policy interventions to improve health outcomes. This information may include evidence on what works well for whom and cost effective strategies to improve outcomes of interest. However, this information is not always readily available or easily communicated. The purposes of this paper are to describe ways advocates seek information for health policy advocacy and to compare advocate demographics. Study design Cross-sectional telephone survey Methods Seventy-seven state-level advocates were asked about the desirable characteristics of policy-relevant information including methods of obtaining information, what makes it useful, and what sources make evidence most reliable/trustworthy. Responses were explored for the full sample and variety of subsamples (i.e., gender, age, and position on social and fiscal issues). Differences between groups were tested using t-tests and one-way analysis of variance. Results On average, advocates rated frequency of seeking research information as 4.3 out of five. Overall, advocates rated the Internet as the top source, rated unbiased research and research with relevancy to their organization as the most important characteristics, and considered information from their organization as most reliable/believable. When ratings were examined by subgroup, the two characteristics most important for each question in the total sample (listed above) emerged as most important for nearly all subgroups. Conclusions Advocates are a resource to policymakers on health topics in the policy process. This study, among the first of its kind, found that advocates seek research information, but have a need for evidence that is unbiased and relevant to their organizations and report that university-based information is reliable. Researchers and advocates should partner so research is useful in advocating for evidence-based policy change.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accessing evidence to inform public health policy: a study to enhance advocacy

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: The Gap Between Researchers and Policymakers And Practitionersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…23 A single piece of evidence is rarely used directly to solve a policy problem. 23 Rather, it is more likely that accumulated evidence leads to changing awareness and may be used retrospectively to justify a position. Understanding the different ways that evidence is used or refuted by policymakers can help researchers when formulating research questions, summarizing key findings, and communicating research in ways that can influence policymakers and practitioners.…”

Section: The Gap Between Researchers and Policymakers And Practitionersmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Translating active living research into policy and practice: One important pathway to chronic disease prevention

Giles-Corti

Sallis

Sugiyama

et al. 2015

J Public Health Pol

134

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Global concerns about rising levels of chronic disease make timely translation of research into policy and practice a priority. There is a need to tackle common risk factors: tobacco use, unhealthy diets, physical inactivity, and harmful alcohol use. Using evidence to inform policy and practice is challenging, often hampered by a poor fit between academic research and the needs of policymakers and practitioners -notably for active living researchers whose objective is to increase population physical activity by changing the ways cities are designed and built. We propose 10 strategies that may facilitate translation of research into health-enhancing urban planning policy. Strategies include interdisciplinary research teams of policymakers and practitioners; undertaking explicitly policy-relevant research; adopting appropriate study designs and methodologies (evaluation of policy initiatives as 'natural experiments'); and adopting dissemination strategies that include knowledge brokers, advocates, and lobbyists. Conducting more policy-relevant research will require training for researchers as well as different rewards in academia.

show abstract

“…Use of research results in medical evidence based decision-making and healthcare evidenceinformed policy advice has been recognized as essential to improve health outcomes (Field, Gauld & Lawrence, 2012;Lomas & Brown, 2009;Sosnowy, Weiss, Maylahn, Pirani & Katagiri, 2013). Despite agreement on the importance of the issue and general consensus on the approaches, implementation of evidence based decision-making processes leaves much room for improvement.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Informing Evidence Based Decisions: Usage Statistics for Online Journal Databases

Botchkarev¹

2017

EBLIP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

2017 Botchkarev. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons-AttributionNoncommercial-Share Alike License 4.0 International (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly attributed, not used for commercial purposes, and, if transformed, the resulting work is redistributed under the same or similar license to this one. AbstractObjective -The primary objective was to examine online journal database usage statistics for a provincial ministry of health in the context of evidence based decision-making. In addition, the study highlights implementation of the Journal Access Centre (JAC) that is housed and powered by the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (MOHLTC) to inform health systems policy-making.Methods -This was a prospective case study using descriptive analysis of the JAC usage statistics of journal articles from

show abstract

Evidence-informed health policy - the crucial role of advocacy

Cited by 13 publications

References 20 publications

Accessing evidence to inform public health policy: a study to enhance advocacy

Accessing evidence to inform public health policy: a study to enhance advocacy

Translating active living research into policy and practice: One important pathway to chronic disease prevention

Informing Evidence Based Decisions: Usage Statistics for Online Journal Databases

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About