Integrating research evidence and physical activity policy making—REPOPA project

Abstract

Evidence shows that regular physical activity is enhanced by supporting environment. Studies are needed to integrate research evidence into health enhancing, cross-sector physical activity (HEPA) policy making. This article presents the rationale, study design, measurement procedures and the initial results of the first phase of six European countries in a five-year research project (2011-2016), REsearch into POlicy to enhance Physical Activity (REPOPA). REPOPA is programmatic research; it consists of linked studies; the first phase studied the use of evidence in 21 policies in implementation to learn more in depth from the policy making process and carried out 86 qualitative stakeholder interviews. The second, ongoing phase builds on the central findings of the first phase in each country; it consists of two sets of interventions: game simulations to study cross-sector collaboration and organizational change processes in the use of evidence and locally tailored interventions to increase knowledge integration. The results of the first two study phases will be tested and validated among policy makers and other stakeholders in the third phase using a Delphi process. Initial results from the first project phase showed the lack of explicit evidence use in HEPA policy making. Facilitators and barriers of the evidence use were the availability of institutional resources and support but also networking between researchers and policy makers. REPOPA will increase understanding use of research evidence in different contexts; develop guidance and tools and establish sustainable structures such as networks and platforms between academics and policy makers across relevant sectors.

Modern approaches to the problem of values’ formation of students’ healthy lifestyle in the course of physical training

“…The following recommendations provided according to the results of researches: − The influence of individual and national factors on self-rated health varies regarding generation. The target generation and the demographic structure of a country should be taken into account to develop more accurate health policies [4]; − REPOPA (REsearch into POlicy to enhance Physical Activity) will increase understanding use of research evidence in different contexts; develop guidance and tools and establish sustainable structures such as networks and platforms between academics and policy makers across relevant sectors [5]; − There is a need for harmonization of surveillance methodologies, indicators and target populations for between-country and over time comparisons. This inventory will serve to feed future discussions within the DEDIPAC-JPI major framework on how to optimize design and identify priorities within surveillance [6]; − The data collected under this HEPA (healthenhancing physical activity) monitoring framework provided, for the first time, an overview of the implementation of HEPA-related policies and actions at the national level throughout the EU [7].…”

Integrative review; identifying the evidence base for policymaking and analysis in health care

“…The contribution of evidence to inform policy is varied. Policymakers may lack skills in translating research evidence into policy decisions (Aro et al, ; Catallo & Sidani, ; Crettenden et al, ; Ellen et al, ; Nabyonga‐Orem, Nanyunja, et al, ). Policies are more acceptable where the evidence base is robust and there is an appreciation for the role of research in supporting the policy development process (Crettenden et al, ).…”

Classifying the types of evidence produced on the Academia da Cidade Program: a scoping review

“…In the field of public policy in physical activity, this could indicate the understanding on the complexity of policy to implement actions to reduce physical inactivity 29 . Beyond this analysis, the results show a contradiction in the body of literature analyzed in this review: despite the growth in the number of scientific publications on physical activity public policy, there is no evident discussion on the public policy analysis, where the term itself is not defined or it is seen as a plan or law 30 , even though it is important for researchers to choose the appropriate tools to help in the development of public policies through the evidence to retro feed those interested in a life cycle of a certain program public policy 19,31 .…”