Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Health Research Policy and Systems 1/2017

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Research

Assessing the capacity of ministries of health to use research in decision-making: conceptual framework and tool

Authors: Daniela C. Rodríguez, Connie Hoe, Elina M. Dale, M. Hafizur Rahman, Sadika Akhter, Assad Hafeez, Wayne Irava, Preety Rajbangshi, Tamlyn Roman, Marcela Ţîrdea, Rouham Yamout, David H. Peters

Published in: Health Research Policy and Systems | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The capacity to demand and use research is critical for governments if they are to develop policies that are informed by evidence. Existing tools designed to assess how government officials use evidence in decision-making have significant limitations for low- and middle-income countries (LMICs); they are rarely tested in LMICs and focus only on individual capacity. This paper introduces an instrument that was developed to assess Ministry of Health (MoH) capacity to demand and use research evidence for decision-making, which was tested for reliability and validity in eight LMICs (Bangladesh, Fiji, India, Lebanon, Moldova, Pakistan, South Africa, Zambia).

Methods

Instrument development was based on a new conceptual framework that addresses individual, organisational and systems capacities, and items were drawn from existing instruments and a literature review. After initial item development and pre-testing to address face validity and item phrasing, the instrument was reduced to 54 items for further validation and item reduction. In-country study teams interviewed a systematic sample of 203 MoH officials. Exploratory factor analysis was used in addition to standard reliability and validity measures to further assess the items.

Results

Thirty items divided between two factors representing organisational and individual capacity constructs were identified. South Africa and Zambia demonstrated the highest level of organisational capacity to use research, whereas Pakistan and Bangladesh were the lowest two. In contrast, individual capacity was highest in Pakistan, followed by South Africa, whereas Bangladesh and Lebanon were the lowest.

Conclusion

The framework and related instrument represent a new opportunity for MoHs to identify ways to understand and improve capacities to incorporate research evidence in decision-making, as well as to provide a basis for tracking change.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
2.
go back to reference Boesen N. Institutions, Power and Politics: Looking for Change Beyond the Boundaries, the Formal and the Functional. In: Ubels J, Acquaye-Baddoo N, Fowler A, editors. Capacity Development in Practice. London: Earthscan; 2010. Boesen N. Institutions, Power and Politics: Looking for Change Beyond the Boundaries, the Formal and the Functional. In: Ubels J, Acquaye-Baddoo N, Fowler A, editors. Capacity Development in Practice. London: Earthscan; 2010.
3.
go back to reference Ward V, House A, Hamer S. Developing a framework for transferring knowledge into action: a thematic analysis of the literature. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2009;14(3):156–64.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Ward V, House A, Hamer S. Developing a framework for transferring knowledge into action: a thematic analysis of the literature. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2009;14(3):156–64.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
go back to reference Weiss CH, Bucuvalas MJ. Social Science Research and Decision-Making. New York: Columbia University Press; 1980. Weiss CH, Bucuvalas MJ. Social Science Research and Decision-Making. New York: Columbia University Press; 1980.
5.
go back to reference Boyko JA, Lavis JN, Dobbins M, Souza NM. Reliability of a tool for measuring theory of planned behaviour constructs for use in evaluating research use in policymaking. Health Res Policy Syst. 2011;9:29.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Boyko JA, Lavis JN, Dobbins M, Souza NM. Reliability of a tool for measuring theory of planned behaviour constructs for use in evaluating research use in policymaking. Health Res Policy Syst. 2011;9:29.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
go back to reference Canadian Health Services Research Foundation. Is Research Working for You? A Self-Assessment Tool and Discussion Guide for Health Services Management and Policy Organizations. Ottawa: Canadian Health Services Research Foundation; 2005. Canadian Health Services Research Foundation. Is Research Working for You? A Self-Assessment Tool and Discussion Guide for Health Services Management and Policy Organizations. Ottawa: Canadian Health Services Research Foundation; 2005.
7.
go back to reference MEASURE Evaluation. Data Demand and Information Use in the Health Sector: Strategies and Tools. Chapel Hill: Carolina Population Center at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; 2006. MEASURE Evaluation. Data Demand and Information Use in the Health Sector: Strategies and Tools. Chapel Hill: Carolina Population Center at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; 2006.
8.
go back to reference Oxman AD, Vandvik PO, Lavis JN, Fretheim A, Lewin S. SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 2: Improving how your organisation supports the use of research evidence to inform policymaking. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7 Suppl 1:S2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Oxman AD, Vandvik PO, Lavis JN, Fretheim A, Lewin S. SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 2: Improving how your organisation supports the use of research evidence to inform policymaking. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7 Suppl 1:S2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
9.
go back to reference National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools. Is Research Working for You? Tool. Hamilton: McMaster University; 2009. National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools. Is Research Working for You? Tool. Hamilton: McMaster University; 2009.
10.
go back to reference Kothari A, Edwards N, Hamel N, Judd M. Is research working for you? validating a tool to examine the capacity of health organizations to use research. Implement Sci. 2009;4:46.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Kothari A, Edwards N, Hamel N, Judd M. Is research working for you? validating a tool to examine the capacity of health organizations to use research. Implement Sci. 2009;4:46.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
12.
go back to reference Beyer JM, Trice HM. The utilization process: a conceptual framework and synthesis of empirical findings. Adm Sci Q. 1982;27(4):591–622.CrossRef Beyer JM, Trice HM. The utilization process: a conceptual framework and synthesis of empirical findings. Adm Sci Q. 1982;27(4):591–622.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Weiss CH. Many meanings of research utilization. Public Admin Rev. 1979;39(5):426–31.CrossRef Weiss CH. Many meanings of research utilization. Public Admin Rev. 1979;39(5):426–31.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference DFID Research. In: Research Programme Consortia, editor. Guidance Note on Capacity Building. London: DFID; 2009. DFID Research. In: Research Programme Consortia, editor. Guidance Note on Capacity Building. London: DFID; 2009.
15.
go back to reference Fowler A, Ubels J. Multiple Dimensions: The Multi-Faceted Nature of Capacity: Two Leading Models. In: Ubels J, Acquaye-Baddoo N, Fowler A, editors. Capacity Development in Practice. London: Earthscan; 2010. Fowler A, Ubels J. Multiple Dimensions: The Multi-Faceted Nature of Capacity: Two Leading Models. In: Ubels J, Acquaye-Baddoo N, Fowler A, editors. Capacity Development in Practice. London: Earthscan; 2010.
16.
go back to reference Ubels J, Acquaye-Baddoo N, Fowler A. A Resource Volume on Capacity Development. In: Ubels J, Acquaye-Baddoo N, Fowler A, editors. Capacity Development in Practice. London: Earthscan; 2010. Ubels J, Acquaye-Baddoo N, Fowler A. A Resource Volume on Capacity Development. In: Ubels J, Acquaye-Baddoo N, Fowler A, editors. Capacity Development in Practice. London: Earthscan; 2010.
17.
go back to reference European Commission. Institutional assessment and capacity development: why, what and how? In: EuropeAid, editor. Tools and Methods Series: Reference Document No 1. Luxembourg: European Commission; 2005. European Commission. Institutional assessment and capacity development: why, what and how? In: EuropeAid, editor. Tools and Methods Series: Reference Document No 1. Luxembourg: European Commission; 2005.
18.
go back to reference Gonzalez Block MA, Mills A. Assessing capacity for health policy and systems research in low and middle income countries*. Health Res Policy Syst. 2003;1:1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Gonzalez Block MA, Mills A. Assessing capacity for health policy and systems research in low and middle income countries*. Health Res Policy Syst. 2003;1:1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
19.
go back to reference Hyder AA, Corluka A, Winch PJ, El-Shinnawy A, Ghassany H, Malekafzali H, Lim MK, Mfutso-Bengo J, Segura E, Ghaffar A. National policy-makers speak out: are researchers giving them what they need? Health Policy Plan. 2011;26(1):73–82.CrossRefPubMed Hyder AA, Corluka A, Winch PJ, El-Shinnawy A, Ghassany H, Malekafzali H, Lim MK, Mfutso-Bengo J, Segura E, Ghaffar A. National policy-makers speak out: are researchers giving them what they need? Health Policy Plan. 2011;26(1):73–82.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Landry R, Lamari M, Amara N. The extent and determinants of the utilization of university research in government agencies. Public Admin Rev. 2003;63(2):192–205.CrossRef Landry R, Lamari M, Amara N. The extent and determinants of the utilization of university research in government agencies. Public Admin Rev. 2003;63(2):192–205.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Majdzadeh R, Yazdizadeh B, Nedjat S, Gholami J, Ahghari S. Strengthening evidence-based decision-making: is it possible without improving health system stewardship? Health Policy Plan. 2012;27(6):499–504.CrossRefPubMed Majdzadeh R, Yazdizadeh B, Nedjat S, Gholami J, Ahghari S. Strengthening evidence-based decision-making: is it possible without improving health system stewardship? Health Policy Plan. 2012;27(6):499–504.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Mitton C, Adair CE, McKenzie E, Patten SB, Waye PB. Knowledge transfer and exchange: review and synthesis of the literature. Milbank Q. 2007;85(4):729–68.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Mitton C, Adair CE, McKenzie E, Patten SB, Waye PB. Knowledge transfer and exchange: review and synthesis of the literature. Milbank Q. 2007;85(4):729–68.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
23.
go back to reference Mitton C, Patten S. Evidence-based priority-setting: What do the decision-makers think? J Health Serv Res Policy. 2004;9(3):146–52.CrossRefPubMed Mitton C, Patten S. Evidence-based priority-setting: What do the decision-makers think? J Health Serv Res Policy. 2004;9(3):146–52.CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Tomson G, Paphassarang C, Jonsson K, Houamboun K, Akkhavong K, Wahlstrom R. Decision-makers and the usefulness of research evidence in policy implementation--a case study from Lao PDR. Soc Sci Med. 2005;61(6):1291–9.CrossRefPubMed Tomson G, Paphassarang C, Jonsson K, Houamboun K, Akkhavong K, Wahlstrom R. Decision-makers and the usefulness of research evidence in policy implementation--a case study from Lao PDR. Soc Sci Med. 2005;61(6):1291–9.CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Cameron D, Lavis JN, Guindon GE, Akhtar T, Becerra Posada F, Ndossi GD, Boupha B. Bridging the gaps among research, policy and practice in ten low- and middle-income countries: development and testing of a questionnaire for researchers. Health Res Policy Syst. 2010;8:4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Cameron D, Lavis JN, Guindon GE, Akhtar T, Becerra Posada F, Ndossi GD, Boupha B. Bridging the gaps among research, policy and practice in ten low- and middle-income countries: development and testing of a questionnaire for researchers. Health Res Policy Syst. 2010;8:4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
26.
go back to reference French B, Thomas LH, Baker P, Burton CR, Pennington L, Roddam H. What can management theories offer evidence-based practice? A comparative analysis of measurement tools for organisational context. Implement Sci. 2009;4:28.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral French B, Thomas LH, Baker P, Burton CR, Pennington L, Roddam H. What can management theories offer evidence-based practice? A comparative analysis of measurement tools for organisational context. Implement Sci. 2009;4:28.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
27.
go back to reference Gholami J, Majdzadeh R, Nedjat S, Maleki K, Ashoorkhani M, Yazdizadeh B. How should we assess knowledge translation in research organizations; designing a knowledge translation self-assessment tool for research institutes (SATORI). Health Res Policy Syst. 2011;9:10.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Gholami J, Majdzadeh R, Nedjat S, Maleki K, Ashoorkhani M, Yazdizadeh B. How should we assess knowledge translation in research organizations; designing a knowledge translation self-assessment tool for research institutes (SATORI). Health Res Policy Syst. 2011;9:10.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
28.
go back to reference Potter C, Brough R. Systemic capacity building: a hierarchy of needs. Health Policy Plan. 2004;19(5):336–45.CrossRefPubMed Potter C, Brough R. Systemic capacity building: a hierarchy of needs. Health Policy Plan. 2004;19(5):336–45.CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Kline P. A handbook of test construction: introduction to psychometric design. London: Methuen; 1986. Kline P. A handbook of test construction: introduction to psychometric design. London: Methuen; 1986.
30.
go back to reference Cortina JM. What is coefficient alpha - an examination of theory and applications. J Appl Psychol. 1993;78(1):98–104.CrossRef Cortina JM. What is coefficient alpha - an examination of theory and applications. J Appl Psychol. 1993;78(1):98–104.CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Streiner DL, Norman GR, Cairney J. Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to their Development and Use. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008.CrossRef Streiner DL, Norman GR, Cairney J. Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to their Development and Use. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008.CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Hawkes S, K Aulakh B, Jadeja N, Jimenez M, Buse K, Anwar I, Barge S, Odubanjo MO, Shukla A, Ghaffar A, et al. Strengthening capacity to apply health research evidence in policy making: experience from four countries. Health Policy Plan. 2016;31(2):161–70.CrossRefPubMed Hawkes S, K Aulakh B, Jadeja N, Jimenez M, Buse K, Anwar I, Barge S, Odubanjo MO, Shukla A, Ghaffar A, et al. Strengthening capacity to apply health research evidence in policy making: experience from four countries. Health Policy Plan. 2016;31(2):161–70.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Assessing the capacity of ministries of health to use research in decision-making: conceptual framework and tool
Authors
Daniela C. Rodríguez
Connie Hoe
Elina M. Dale
M. Hafizur Rahman
Sadika Akhter
Assad Hafeez
Wayne Irava
Preety Rajbangshi
Tamlyn Roman
Marcela Ţîrdea
Rouham Yamout
David H. Peters
Publication date
01-12-2017
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Health Research Policy and Systems / Issue 1/2017
Electronic ISSN: 1478-4505
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-017-0227-3

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

Health Research Policy and Systems 1/2017 Go to the issue