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 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Health Research Policy and Systems
Published in: Health Research Policy and Systems 1/2013

Open Access 01-12-2013 | Research

The global stock of research evidence relevant to health systems policymaking

Authors: Michael G Wilson, Kaelan A Moat, John N Lavis

Published in: Health Research Policy and Systems | Issue 1/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Policymakers and stakeholders need immediate access to many types of research evidence to make informed decisions about the full range of questions that may arise regarding health systems.

Methods

We examined all types of research evidence about governance, financial and delivery arrangements, and implementation strategies within health systems contained in Health Systems Evidence (HSE) (http://​www.​healthsystemsevi​dence.​org). The research evidence types include evidence briefs for policy, overviews of systematic reviews, systematic reviews of effects, systematic reviews addressing other questions, systematic reviews in progress, systematic reviews being planned, economic evaluations, and health reform and health system descriptions. Specifically, we describe their distribution across health system topics and domains, trends in their production over time, availability of supplemental content in various languages, and the extent to which they focus on low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), as well as (for systematic reviews) their methodological quality and the availability of user-friendly summaries.

Results

As of July 2013, HSE contained 2,629 systematic reviews of effects (of which 501 are Cochrane reviews), 614 systematic reviews addressing other questions, 283 systematic reviews in progress, 186 systematic reviews being planned, 140 review-derived products (evidence briefs and overviews of systematic reviews), 1,669 economic evaluations, 1,092 health reform descriptions, and 209 health system descriptions. Most systematic reviews address topics related to delivery arrangements (n = 2,663) or implementation strategies (n = 1,653) with far fewer addressing financial (n = 241) or governance arrangements (n = 231). In addition, 2,928 systematic reviews have been quality appraised with moderate AMSTAR ratings found for reviews addressing governance (5.6/11), financial (5.9/11), and delivery (6.3/11) arrangements and implementation strategies (6.5/11); 1,075 systematic reviews have no independently produced user-friendly summary and only 737 systematic reviews have an LMIC focus. Literature searches for half of the systematic reviews (n = 1,584, 49%) were conducted within the last five years.

Conclusions

Greater effort needs to focus on assessing whether the current distribution of systematic reviews corresponds to policymakers’ and stakeholders’ priorities, updating systematic reviews, increasing the quality of systematic reviews, and focusing on LMICs.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Lavis JN, Davies HTO, Oxman AD, Denis J-L, 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
2.
Lavis JN, Posada FB, Haines A, Osei E: Use of research to inform public policymaking. Lancet. 2004, 364: 1615-1621. 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)17317-0.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Lavis JN, Davies HTO, Gruen RL: Working within and beyond the Cochrane Collaboration to make systematic reviews more useful to healthcare managers and policy makers. Healthcare Policy. 2006, 1: 21-33.PubMedPubMedCentral
4.
Egger M, Smith GD, O'Rourke K: Rationale, potentials, and promise of systematic reviews. Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Meta-Analysis in Context. 2001, ondon: BMJ Books: 2nd edition. Egger M, Smith GD, Altman DG (Eds.), 3-19.CrossRef
5.
6.
Montori VM, Wilczynski NL, Morgan D, Haynes RB, for the Hedges Team: Optimal search strategies for retrieving systematic reviews from Medline: analytical survey. BMJ. 2004, 330: 68-CrossRefPubMed
7.
Wilczynski NL, Haynes RB: for the Hedges Team: EMBASE search strategies achieved high sensitivity and specificity for retrieving methodologically sound systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007, 60: 29-33. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.04.001.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Dobbins M, DeCorby K, Robeson P, Husson H, Tirilis D, Greco L: A knowledge management tool for public health: health-evidence.ca. BMC Publ, Health. 2010, 10: 496-10.1186/1471-2458-10-496.CrossRef
9.
10.
Moat KA, Lavis JN, Wilson MG, Røttingen J-A, Bärnighausen T: Twelve myths about systematic reviews for health system policymaking. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2013, 18 (1): 44-50. 10.1258/jhsrp.2012.011175.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Rockers PC, Feigl A, Røttingen J-A, Fretheim A, De Ferranti D, Lavis JN, Melberg HO, Bärnighausen T: Study-design selection criteria in systematic reviews of effectiveness of health systems interventions and reforms: A meta-review. Health Policy. 2012, 104: 206-214. 10.1016/j.healthpol.2011.12.007.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Moat KA, Lavis JN: Supporting the use of Cochrane Reviews in health policy and management decision-making: Health Systems Evidence [editorial]. The Cochrane Library. 2011, 8: ED000019-
13.
Shea B, Grimshaw J, Wells G, Boers M, Andersson N, Hamel C, Porter AC, Tugwell P, Moher D, Bouter LM: Development of AMSTAR: A measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007, 7: 10-10.1186/1471-2288-7-10.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
15.
16.
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG: The PRISMA group: preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009, 6: e1000097-10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
Lavis JN, Røttingen J-A, Bosch-Capblanch X, Atun RA, El-Jardali F, Gilson L, Lewin S, Oliver S, Ongolo-Zogo P, Haines A: Guidance for evidence-informed policies about health systems: Linking guidance development to policy development. PLoS Medicine. 2012, 9 (3): e1001186-10.1371/journal.pmed.1001186.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
Bosch-Capblanch X, Lavis JN, Lewin S, Atun R, Røttingen J-A, Dröschel D, Beck L, Abalos E, El-Jardali F, Gilson L, Oliver S, Wyss K, Tugwell P, Kulier R, Pang T, Haines A: Guidance for evidence-informed policies about health systems: rationale for and challenges of guidance development. PLoS Med. 2012, 9 (3): e1001185-10.1371/journal.pmed.1001185.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
19.
Lewin S, Bosch-Capblanch X, Oliver S, Akl EA, Vist GE, Lavis JN, Ghersi D, Røttingen JA, Steinmann P, Gulmezoglu M, Tugwell P, El-Jardali F, Haines A: Guidance for Evidence-Informed Policies about Health Systems: Assessing How Much Confidence to Place in the Research Evidence. PLoS Med. 2012, 9 (3): e1001187-10.1371/journal.pmed.1001187.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
The global stock of research evidence relevant to health systems policymaking
Authors
Michael G Wilson
Kaelan A Moat
John N Lavis
Publication date
01-12-2013
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Health Research Policy and Systems / Issue 1/2013
Electronic ISSN: 1478-4505
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1478-4505-11-32

Other articles of this Issue 1/2013

Health Research Policy and Systems 1/2013 Go to the issue

Research

Promoting universal financial protection: a policy analysis of universal health coverage in Costa Rica (1940–2000)

Review

Physical inactivity as a policy problem: applying a concept from policy analysis to a public health issue

Research

Developing a new perspective to study the health of survivors of Sichuan earthquakes in China: a study on the effect of post-earthquake rescue policies on survivors’ health-related quality of life

Research

Health policy and systems research in access to medicines: a prioritized agenda for low- and middle-income countries

Research

Establishing a national influenza sentinel surveillance system in a limited resource setting, experience of Sierra Leone

Research

Exploring the uptake and framing of research evidence on universal screening for intimate partner violence against women: a knowledge translation case study