Promoting Evidence to Policy Link on the Control of Infectious Diseases of Poverty in Nigeria: Outcome of A Multi-Stakeholders Policy Dialogue

Uneke, Chigozie Jesse; Ezeoha, Abel Ebeh; Uro-Chukwu, Henry Chukwuemeka; Ezeonu, Chinonyelum Thecla; Ogbu, Ogbonnaya; Onwe, Friday; Edoga, Chima

doi:10.15171/hpp.2015.013

Cited by 25 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 15 publications

(27 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…the most common variables and relationships addressed, were as follows: ◦ descriptions ( n = 33 of 38 studies) [ 23 – 38 , 40 – 43 , 46 – 49 , 51 – 56 , 58 – 60 ] were more common than formative evaluations ( n = 18) [ 23 , 27 , 33 , 36 , 37 , 43 – 47 , 50 , 52 , 54 , 55 , 57 – 60 ], summative evaluations ( n = 15) [ 24 , 33 , 36 , 43 , 46 , 47 , 50 – 56 , 58 , 59 ], or studies of other linkages among variables ( n = 4) [ 23 , 33 , 36 , 45 ]; ◦ of the descriptive studies, context ( n = 24 of 33 studies) [ 24 – 26 , 28 – 38 , 40 – 43 , 48 , 49 , 52 – 54 , 56 ] was the most common focus, followed by activities/outputs ( n = 17) [ 26 , 27 , …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…◦ of the formative evaluations, evidence briefs ( n = 8 of 18 studies) [ 33 , 43 , 44 , 47 , 52 , 55 , 57 , 59 ] and deliberative dialogues ( n = 6) [ 33 , 47 , 52 , 55 , 57 , 59 ] were the most common activities and outputs examined;…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…the most common data collection methods used were interviews ( n = 20 of 38 studies) [ 23 , 24 , 26 , 27 , 33 – 38 , 42 , 44 – 46 , 49 , 51 , 54 , 58 – 60 ], surveys ( n = 17) [ 27 , 28 , 30 – 32 , 34 , 40 , 42 , 43 , 46 , 47 , 50 – 52 , 56 , 57 , 59 ] and case studies involving multiple methods ( n = 4) [ 54 , 56 , 59 , 60 ] (there were 12 articles studying only one case [ 35 , 43 – 46 , 48 , 54 , 56 – 60 ] and only 4 of them used more than one data collection method).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Lessons learned from descriptions and evaluations of knowledge translation platforms supporting evidence-informed policy-making in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review

Partridge

Mansilla

Randhawa

et al. 2020

Health Res Policy Sys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Knowledge translation (KT) platforms are organisations, initiatives and networks that focus on supporting evidence-informed policy-making at least in part about the health-system arrangements that determine whether the right programmes, services and products get to those who need them. Many descriptions and evaluations of KT platforms in low- and middle-income countries have been produced but, to date, they have not been systematically reviewed. Methods We identified potentially relevant studies through a search of five electronic databases and a variety of approaches to identify grey literature. We used four criteria to select eligible empirical studies. We extracted data about seven characteristics of included studies and about key findings. We used explicit criteria to assess study quality. In synthesising the findings, we gave greater attention to themes that emerged from multiple studies, higher-quality studies and different contexts. Results Country was the most common jurisdictional focus of KT platforms, EVIPNet the most common name and high turnover among staff a common infrastructural feature. Evidence briefs and deliberative dialogues were the activities/outputs that were the most extensively studied and viewed as helpful, while rapid evidence services were the next most studied but only in a single jurisdiction. None of the summative evaluations used a pre–post design or a control group and, with the exception of the evaluations of the influence of briefs and dialogues on intentions to act, none of the evaluations achieved a high quality score. Conclusions A large and growing volume of research evidence suggests that KT platforms offer promise in supporting evidence-informed policy-making in low- and middle-income countries. KT platforms should consider as next steps expanding their current, relatively limited portfolio of activities and outputs, building bridges to complementary groups, and planning for evaluations that examine ‘what works’ for ‘what types of issues’ in ‘what types of contexts’.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Lessons learned from descriptions and evaluations of knowledge translation platforms supporting evidence-informed policy-making in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review

Partridge

Mansilla

Randhawa

et al. 2020

Health Res Policy Sys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These dialogues “ allow research evidence to be considered together with the views, experiences and tacit knowledge of those who will be involved in, or affected by, future decisions about a high-priority issue ” [ 10 ]. They are used to draw on the knowledge of various key stakeholders involved in addressing a societal issue, such as researchers, policy-makers, practitioners and civil society organisations (CSOs) [ 11 – 14 ]. The value of this deliberative process lies in the fact that RBE is just one of the factors influencing decision-making, and that a variety of actors, not just policy-makers, can also act and contribute significantly to decision-making processes [ 10 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A deliberative dialogue as a knowledge translation strategy on road traffic injuries in Burkina Faso: a mixed-method evaluation

Sween-Cadieux

Dagenais

Ridde

2018

Health Res Policy Sys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionDeliberative dialogues are increasingly being used, particularly on the African continent. They are a promising interactive knowledge translation strategy that brings together and leverages the knowledge of diverse stakeholders important to the resolution of a societal issue. Following a research project carried out in Burkina Faso on road traffic injuries, a 1-day workshop in the form of a deliberative dialogue was organised in November 2015. The workshop brought together actors involved in road safety, such as researchers, police and fire brigades, health professionals, non-governmental and civil society organisations, and representatives of government structures. The objective was to present the research results, propose recommendations to improve the situation and develop a collective action plan.MethodTo better understand the workshop’s utility and effects, a mixed-method evaluation was conducted. Data were obtained from two questionnaires distributed at the end of the workshop (n = 37) and 14 qualitative interviews with participants 6–10 weeks after the workshop. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse the quantitative data, and a thematic analysis was conducted for the qualitative data.ResultsThe data revealed several positive impacts of the workshop, such as the acquisition of new knowledge about road safety, the opportunity for participants to learn from each other, the creation of post-workshop collaborations, and individual behaviour changes. However, several challenges were encountered that constrained the potential effects of the workshop, including the limited presence of political actors, the lack of engagement among participants to develop an action plan, and the difficulty in setting up a monitoring committee following the workshop.ConclusionWhile the deliberative workshop is not the standard format for reporting research results in Burkina Faso, this model should be reproduced in different contexts. This interactive knowledge translation strategy is useful to benefit from the experiential knowledge of the various actors and to encourage their involvement in formulating recommendations.

show abstract

“…The use of policy briefs and policy dialogues are major strategies of achieving evidence to policy link. In Nigeria policy briefs and policy dialogues have been used to promote evidence informed policymaking [70,71]. Lavis et al [72], noted that policy brief is an effective evidence-packaging mechanism and a new approach to improving the policy-making process by supporting evidence-informed policy-making.…”

Section: Develop Policy Briefs and Undertake Policy Dialoguementioning

confidence: 99%

Promoting the use of evidence in health policymaking in the ECOWAS region: the development and contextualization of an evidence-based policymaking guidance

Uneke

Sombié

Johnson

et al. 2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The Economic Commission of the West African States (ECOWAS), through her specialised health Institution, the West African Health Organization (WAHO) is supporting Members States to improve health outcomes in West Africa. There is a global recognition that evidence-based health policies are vital towards achieving continued improvement in health outcomes. The need to have a tool that will provide systematic guide on the use of evidence in policymaking necessitated the production of the evidence-based policy-making (EBPM) Guidance. Methods Google search was performed to identify existing guidance on EBPM. Lessons were drawn from the review of identified guidance documents. Consultation, interaction and interviews were held with policymakers from the 15 West African countries during WAHO organized regional meetings in Senegal, Nigeria, and Burkina Faso. The purpose was to elicit their views on the strategies to promote the use of evidence in policymaking to be included in the EBPM Guidance. A regional Guidance Validation Meeting for West African policymakers was thereafter convened by WAHO to review findings from review of existing guidance documents and validate the EBPM Guidance. Results Out of the 250 publications screened, six publications fulfilled the study inclusion criteria and were reviewed. Among the important issues highlighted include: what evidence informed decision-making is; different types of research methods, designs and approaches, and how to judge the quality of research. The identified main target end users of the EBPM Guidance are policy/decision makers in the West African sub-region, at local, sub-national, national and regional levels. Among the key recommendations included in the EBPM Guidance include: properly defining/refining policy problem; reviewing contextual issues; initiating policy priority setting; considering political acceptability of policy; commissioning research; use of rapid response services, use of policy advisory/technical/steering committees; and use of policy briefs and policy dialogue. Conclusion The EBPM Guidance is one of the emerging tools that can enhance the understanding of evidence to policy process. The strategies to facilitate the use of evidence in policymaking outlined in the Guidance, can be adapted to local context, and incorporated validated approaches that can be used to promote evidence-to-policy-to-practice process in West Africa.

show abstract

Promoting Evidence to Policy Link on the Control of Infectious Diseases of Poverty in Nigeria: Outcome of A Multi-Stakeholders Policy Dialogue

Cited by 25 publications

References 15 publications

Lessons learned from descriptions and evaluations of knowledge translation platforms supporting evidence-informed policy-making in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review

Lessons learned from descriptions and evaluations of knowledge translation platforms supporting evidence-informed policy-making in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review

A deliberative dialogue as a knowledge translation strategy on road traffic injuries in Burkina Faso: a mixed-method evaluation

Promoting the use of evidence in health policymaking in the ECOWAS region: the development and contextualization of an evidence-based policymaking guidance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About