Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Systematic Reviews 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Research

Developing a rapid-response program for health system decision-makers in Canada: findings from an issue brief and stakeholder dialogue

Authors: Michael G Wilson, John N Lavis, Francois-Pierre Gauvin

Published in: Systematic Reviews | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

There is currently no mechanism in place outside of government to provide rapid syntheses of the best available research evidence about problems, options and/or implementation considerations related to a specific health system challenge that Canadian health system decision-makers need to address in a timely manner. A ‘rapid-response’ program could address this gap by providing access to optimally packaged, relevant and high-quality research evidence over short periods of time (i.e. days or weeks).

Methods

We prepared an issue brief that describes the best available research evidence related to the problem, three broad features of a program that addresses the problem and implementation considerations. We identified systematic reviews by searching for organization-targeted implementation strategies in Health Systems Evidence (www.​healthsystemsevi​dence.​org) and drew on an existing analytical framework for how knowledge-brokering organizations can organize themselves to operationalize the program features. The issue brief was then used to inform a half-day stakeholder dialogue about whether and how to develop a rapid-response program for health system decision-makers in Canada. We thematically synthesized the deliberations.

Results

We found very few relevant systematic reviews but used frameworks and examples from existing programs to 1) outline key considerations for organizing a rapid-response program,, 2) determine what can be done in timelines ranging from 3 to 10 and 30 business days, and 3) define success and measure it. The 11 dialogue participants from across Canada largely agreed with the content presented in the brief, but noted two key challenges to consider: securing stable, long-term funding and finding a way to effectively and equitably manage the expected demand. Recommendations and suggestions for next steps from dialogue participants included taking an ‘organic’ approach to developing a pan-Canadian network and including jurisdictional scans as a type of product to deliver through the program (rather than only syntheses of research evidence).

Conclusions

Dialogue participants clearly signalled that there is an appetite for a rapid-response program for health system decision-makers in Canada. To ‘organically’ build such a program, we are currently engaging in efforts to build partnerships and secure funding to support the creation of a pan-Canadian network for conducting rapid syntheses for health system decision-makers in Canada.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
2.
go back to reference Institut national d’excellence en santé et en services sociaux (INESSS). Les produits de l’INESS. Montréal, Canada: INESS; 2013. Institut national d’excellence en santé et en services sociaux (INESSS). Les produits de l’INESS. Montréal, Canada: INESS; 2013.
4.
go back to reference Ottawa Hospital Research Institute. Knowledge to action. Ottawa: Ottawa Hospital Research Institute; 2014. Ottawa Hospital Research Institute. Knowledge to action. Ottawa: Ottawa Hospital Research Institute; 2014.
6.
go back to reference Bennet G, Jessani N. The Knowledge Translation Toolkit. Ottawa, Canada: International Development Research Centre; 2011. Bennet G, Jessani N. The Knowledge Translation Toolkit. Ottawa, Canada: International Development Research Centre; 2011.
8.
go back to reference Moat KA, Lavis JN, Clancy SJ, El-Jardali F, Pantoja T. Evidence briefs and deliberative dialogues: perceptions and intentions to act on what was learnt. Bull World Health Organ. 2014;92:20–8.CrossRefPubMed Moat KA, Lavis JN, Clancy SJ, El-Jardali F, Pantoja T. Evidence briefs and deliberative dialogues: perceptions and intentions to act on what was learnt. Bull World Health Organ. 2014;92:20–8.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Shea B, Grimshaw J, Wells G, Boers M, Andersson N, Hamel C, et al. Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007;7:10–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Shea B, Grimshaw J, Wells G, Boers M, Andersson N, Hamel C, et al. Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007;7:10–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
go back to reference Lavis JN, Jessani N, Catallo C, Permanand G, Zierler A, BRIDGE Study Team. Matching form to function: designing organizational models to support knowledge brokering in European Health Systems. Policy Summary 9 (BRIDGE Series). Copenhagen, Denmark: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2013. Lavis JN, Jessani N, Catallo C, Permanand G, Zierler A, BRIDGE Study Team. Matching form to function: designing organizational models to support knowledge brokering in European Health Systems. Policy Summary 9 (BRIDGE Series). Copenhagen, Denmark: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2013.
12.
go back to reference Wilson MG, Lavis JN, Gauvin FP. Issue brief: developing a ‘rapid response’ program for health system decision-makers in Canada. Hamilton, Canada: McMaster Health Forum; 2014. Wilson MG, Lavis JN, Gauvin FP. Issue brief: developing a ‘rapid response’ program for health system decision-makers in Canada. Hamilton, Canada: McMaster Health Forum; 2014.
13.
go back to reference Wilson MG, Gauvin FP, Lavis JN. Dialogue summary: developing a ‘rapid response’ program for health system decision-makers in Canada. Hamilton, Canada: McMaster Health Forum; 2014. Wilson MG, Gauvin FP, Lavis JN. Dialogue summary: developing a ‘rapid response’ program for health system decision-makers in Canada. Hamilton, Canada: McMaster Health Forum; 2014.
14.
go back to reference Pitchforth E, Nolte E, Miani C, Winpenny E. Options for effective mechanisms to support evidence-informed policymaking in reproductive, material, newborn and child health in Asia and the Pacific. Cambridge, United Kingdom: RAND Europe; 2013. Pitchforth E, Nolte E, Miani C, Winpenny E. Options for effective mechanisms to support evidence-informed policymaking in reproductive, material, newborn and child health in Asia and the Pacific. Cambridge, United Kingdom: RAND Europe; 2013.
15.
go back to reference Healy J, Maxwell J, Hong PK, Lin V. Responding to requests for information on health systems from policy makers in Asian countries. Geneva, Switzerland: Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research; 2007. Healy J, Maxwell J, Hong PK, Lin V. Responding to requests for information on health systems from policy makers in Asian countries. Geneva, Switzerland: Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research; 2007.
16.
go back to reference Bunn F, Sworn K. Strategies to promote the impact of systematic reviews on healthcare policy: a systematic review of the literature. Evidence Policy. 2011;7:403–28.CrossRef Bunn F, Sworn K. Strategies to promote the impact of systematic reviews on healthcare policy: a systematic review of the literature. Evidence Policy. 2011;7:403–28.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Moore G, Redman S, Haines M, Todd A. What works to increase the use of research in population health policy and programmes: a review. Evidence Policy. 2011;7:277–305.CrossRef Moore G, Redman S, Haines M, Todd A. What works to increase the use of research in population health policy and programmes: a review. Evidence Policy. 2011;7:277–305.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Perrier L, Mrklas K, Lavis J, Straus S. Interventions encouraging the use of systematic reviews by health policymakers and managers: a systematic review. Implement Sci. 2011;6:43.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Perrier L, Mrklas K, Lavis J, Straus S. Interventions encouraging the use of systematic reviews by health policymakers and managers: a systematic review. Implement Sci. 2011;6:43.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
19.
go back to reference Mitton C, Adair CE, McKenzie E, Patten SB, Wayne PB. Knowledge transfer and exchange: review and synthesis of the literature. Milbank Q. 2007;85:729–68.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Mitton C, Adair CE, McKenzie E, Patten SB, Wayne PB. Knowledge transfer and exchange: review and synthesis of the literature. Milbank Q. 2007;85:729–68.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
go back to reference Armitage CJ, Conner M. Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: a meta-analytic review. Br J Soc Psychol. 2001;40:471–99.CrossRefPubMed Armitage CJ, Conner M. Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: a meta-analytic review. Br J Soc Psychol. 2001;40:471–99.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Sheeran P. Intention-behavior relations: a conceptual and empirical review. In: Strobe W, Hewscone M, editors. European Review of Social Psychology. Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2002. p. 1–36. Sheeran P. Intention-behavior relations: a conceptual and empirical review. In: Strobe W, Hewscone M, editors. European Review of Social Psychology. Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2002. p. 1–36.
22.
go back to reference Eccles MP, Hrisos S, Francis J, Kaner EF, Dickinson HO, Beyer F, et al. Do self- reported intentions predict clinicians’ behaviour: a systematic review. Implement Sci. 2006;1:28.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Eccles MP, Hrisos S, Francis J, Kaner EF, Dickinson HO, Beyer F, et al. Do self- reported intentions predict clinicians’ behaviour: a systematic review. Implement Sci. 2006;1:28.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
23.
go back to reference Lavis JN, Wilson MG, Grimshaw J, Haynes RB, Hanna S, Raina P, et al. Effects of an evidence service on healthcare policymakers’ use research evidence: a protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Implement Sci. 2011;6:51.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Lavis JN, Wilson MG, Grimshaw J, Haynes RB, Hanna S, Raina P, et al. Effects of an evidence service on healthcare policymakers’ use research evidence: a protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Implement Sci. 2011;6:51.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
24.
go back to reference Campbell D, Donald B, Moore G, Frew D. Evidence Check: knowledge brokering to commission research reviews for policy. Evidence Policy. 2011;7:97–107.CrossRef Campbell D, Donald B, Moore G, Frew D. Evidence Check: knowledge brokering to commission research reviews for policy. Evidence Policy. 2011;7:97–107.CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Khangura S, Polisena J, Clifford TJ, Farrah K, Kamel C. Rapid review: an emerging approach to evidence synthesis in health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care2014, Epub ahead of print: 1–8. Khangura S, Polisena J, Clifford TJ, Farrah K, Kamel C. Rapid review: an emerging approach to evidence synthesis in health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care2014, Epub ahead of print: 1–8.
Metadata
Title
Developing a rapid-response program for health system decision-makers in Canada: findings from an issue brief and stakeholder dialogue
Authors
Michael G Wilson
John N Lavis
Francois-Pierre Gauvin
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Systematic Reviews / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 2046-4053
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-015-0009-3

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

Systematic Reviews 1/2015 Go to the issue