Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Implementation Science
Published in: Implementation Science 1/2011

Open Access 01-12-2011 | Systematic review

Interventions encouraging the use of systematic reviews by health policymakers and managers: A systematic review

Authors: Laure Perrier, Kelly Mrklas, John N Lavis, Sharon E Straus

Published in: Implementation Science | Issue 1/2011

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Systematic reviews have the potential to inform decisions made by health policymakers and managers, yet little is known about the impact of interventions to increase the use of systematic reviews by these groups in decision making.

Methods

We systematically reviewed the evidence on the impact of interventions for seeking, appraising, and applying evidence from systematic reviews in decision making by health policymakers or managers. Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Methodology Register, Health Technology Assessment Database, and LISA were searched from the earliest date available until April 2010. Two independent reviewers selected studies for inclusion if the intervention intended to increase seeking, appraising, or applying evidence from systematic reviews by a health policymaker or manager. Minimum inclusion criteria were a description of the study population and availability of extractable data.

Results

11,297 titles and abstracts were reviewed, leading to retrieval of 37 full-text articles for assessment; four of these articles met all inclusion criteria. Three articles described one study where five systematic reviews were mailed to public health officials and followed up with surveys at three months and two years. The articles reported from 23% to 63% of respondents declaring they had used systematic reviews in policymaking decisions. One randomised trial indicated that tailored messages combined with access to a registry of systematic reviews had a significant effect on policies made in the area of healthy body weight promotion in health departments.

Conclusions

The limited empirical data renders the strength of evidence weak for the effectiveness and the types of interventions that encourage health policymakers and managers to use systematic reviews in decision making.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Brownson RC, Royer C, Ewing R, McBride TD: Researchers and policymakers: travelers in parallel universes. Am J Prev Med. 2006, 30: 164-172. 10.1016/j.amepre.2005.10.004.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Browman GP, Snider A, Ellis P: Negotiating for change. The healthcare manager as catalyst for evidence-based practice: changing the healthcare environment and sharing experience. Healthc Pap. 2003, 3: 10-22.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Pope C, Mays N, Popay J: How can we synthesize qualitative and quantitative evidence for healthcare policy-makers and managers?. Healthc Manage Forum. 2006, 19: 27-31.CrossRefPubMed
4.
5.
Lavis J, Davies H, Oxman A, Denis JL, Golden-Biddle K, Ferlie E: Towards systematic reviews that inform health care management and policy-making. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2005, 10 (Suppl 1): 35-48.CrossRefPubMed
6.
7.
Alper BS, Hand JA, Elliott SG, Kinkade S, Hauan MJ, Onion DK, Sklar BM: How much effort is needed to keep up with the literature relevant for primary care?. J Med Libr Assoc. 2004, 92: 429-437.PubMedPubMedCentral
8.
Arksey H, O'Malley L: Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 2005, 8: 19-32. 10.1080/1364557032000119616.CrossRef
9.
10.
Berlin JA: Does blinding of readers affect the results of meta-analyses? University of Pennsylvania Meta-analysis Blinding Study Group. Lancet. 1997, 350: 185-186.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Kjaergard LL, Villumsen J, Gluud C: Reported methodologic quality and discrepancies between large and small randomized trials in meta-analyses. Ann Intern Med. 2001, 135: 982-989.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Downs SH, Black N: The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1998, 52: 377-84. 10.1136/jech.52.6.377.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
Adamo KB, Prince SA, Tricco AC, Connor-Gorber S, Tremblay M: A comparison of indirect versus direct measures for assessing physical activity in the pediatric population: a systematic review. Int J Pediatr Obes. 2009, 4: 2-27. 10.1080/17477160802315010.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Ciliska D, Hayward S, Dobbins M, Brunton G, Underwood J: Transferring public-health nursing research to health-system planning: Assessing the relevance and accessibility of systematic reviews. Canadian Journal of Nursing Research. 1999, 31: 23-36.PubMed
15.
Dobbins M, Cockerill R, Barnsley J: Factors affecting the utilization of systematic reviews. A study of public health decision makers. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. 2001, 17: 203-214. 10.1017/S0266462300105069.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Dobbins M, Cockerill R, Barnsley J, Ciliska D: Factors of the innovation, organization, environment, and individual that predict the influence five systematic reviews had on public health decisions. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. 2001, 17: 467-478.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Dobbins M, Hanna SE, Ciliska D, Manske S, Cameron R, Mercer SL, O'Mara L, DeCorby K, Robeson P: A randomized controlled trial evaluating the impact of knowledge translation and exchange strategies. Implement Sci. 2009, 4: 61-10.1186/1748-5908-4-61.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
Best Evidence Medical Education Collaboration: Guide for topic review groups on carrying out BEME systematic reviews, version 2. Information for prospective topic review groups. 2003
19.
Arksey H, O'Malley L: Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 2005, 8: 19-32. 10.1080/1364557032000119616.CrossRef
20.
Dobbins M, Jack S, Thomas H, Kothari A: Public health decision-makers' informational needs and preferences for receiving research evidence. Worldviews Evid Based Nurs. 2007, 4: 156-63. 10.1111/j.1741-6787.2007.00089.x.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Nelson CE, Roberts J, Maederer CM, Wertheimer B, Johnson B: The utilization of social science information by policymakers. American Behavioral Scientist. 1987, 30: 569-10.1177/000276487030006003.CrossRef
22.
Lomas J: Using research to inform healthcare managers' and policy makers' questions: from summative to interpretive synthesis. Healthcare Policy. 2005, 1: 55-71.PubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
Interventions encouraging the use of systematic reviews by health policymakers and managers: A systematic review
Authors
Laure Perrier
Kelly Mrklas
John N Lavis
Sharon E Straus
Publication date
01-12-2011
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Implementation Science / Issue 1/2011
Electronic ISSN: 1748-5908
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-6-43

Other articles of this Issue 1/2011

Implementation Science 1/2011 Go to the issue

Study protocol

The efficacy of computer reminders on external quality assessment for point-of-care testing in Danish general practice: rationale and methodology for two randomized trials

Methodology

Application of GRADE: Making evidence-based recommendations about diagnostic tests in clinical practice guidelines

Study protocol

Evaluation of a clinical decision support tool for osteoporosis disease management: protocol for an interrupted time series design

Research

A comparison of policy and direct practice stakeholder perceptions of factors affecting evidence-based practice implementation using concept mapping

Research

How to develop a program to increase influenza vaccine uptake among workers in health care settings?

Research

From PALSA PLUS to PALM PLUS: adapting and developing a South African guideline and training intervention to better integrate HIV/AIDS care with primary care in rural health centers in Malawi