Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Implementation Science 1/2008

Open Access 01-12-2008 | Research article

Evidence-informed health policy 4 – Case descriptions of organizations that support the use of research evidence

Authors: John N Lavis, Ray Moynihan, Andrew D Oxman, Elizabeth J Paulsen

Published in: Implementation Science | Issue 1/2008

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Previous efforts to produce case descriptions have typically not focused on the organizations that produce research evidence and support its use. External evaluations of such organizations have typically not been analyzed as a group to identify the lessons that have emerged across multiple evaluations. Case descriptions offer the potential for capturing the views and experiences of many individuals who are familiar with an organization, including staff, advocates, and critics.

Methods

We purposively sampled a subgroup of organizations from among those that participated in the second (interview) phase of the study and (once) from among other organizations with which we were familiar. We developed and pilot-tested a case description data collection protocol, and conducted site visits that included both interviews and documentary analyses. Themes were identified from among responses to semi-structured questions using a constant comparative method of analysis. We produced both a brief (one to two pages) written description and a video documentary for each case.

Results

We conducted 51 interviews as part of the eight site visits. Two organizational strengths were repeatedly cited by individuals participating in the site visits: use of an evidence-based approach (which was identified as being very time-consuming) and existence of a strong relationship between researchers and policymakers (which can be challenged by conflicts of interest). Two organizational weaknesses – a lack of resources and the presence of conflicts of interest – were repeatedly cited by individuals participating in the site visits. Participants offered two main suggestions for the World Health Organization (and other international organizations and networks): 1) mobilize one or more of government support, financial resources, and the participation of both policymakers and researchers; and 2) create knowledge-related global public goods.

Conclusion

The findings from our case descriptions, the first of their kind, intersect in interesting ways with the messages arising from two systematic reviews of the factors that increase the prospects for research use in policymaking. Strong relationships between researchers and policymakers bodes well given such interactions appear to increase the prospects for research use. The time-consuming nature of an evidence-based approach, on the other hand, suggests the need for more efficient production processes that are 'quick and clean enough.' Our case descriptions and accompanying video documentaries provide a rich description of organizations supporting the use of research evidence, which can be drawn upon by those establishing or leading similar organizations, particularly in low- and middle-income countries.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Lavis JN, Oxman AD, Moynihan R, Paulsen EJ: Evidence-informed health policy 1 – Synthesis of findings from a multi-method study of organizations that support the use of research evidence. Implementation Science. 2008, 3: 53-10.1186/1748-5908-3-53.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Lavis JN, Oxman AD, Moynihan R, Paulsen EJ: Evidence-informed health policy 1 – Synthesis of findings from a multi-method study of organizations that support the use of research evidence. Implementation Science. 2008, 3: 53-10.1186/1748-5908-3-53.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
2.
go back to reference Lavis JN, Paulsen EJ, Oxman AD, Moynihan R: Evidence-informed health policy 2 – Survey of organizations that support the use of research evidence. Implementation Science. 2008, 3: 54-10.1186/1748-5908-3-54.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Lavis JN, Paulsen EJ, Oxman AD, Moynihan R: Evidence-informed health policy 2 – Survey of organizations that support the use of research evidence. Implementation Science. 2008, 3: 54-10.1186/1748-5908-3-54.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
go back to reference Lavis JN, Oxman AD, Moynihan R, Paulsen EJ: Evidence-informed health policy 3 – Interviews with the directors of organizations that support the use of research evidence. Implementation Science. 2008, 3: 55-10.1186/1748-5908-3-55.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Lavis JN, Oxman AD, Moynihan R, Paulsen EJ: Evidence-informed health policy 3 – Interviews with the directors of organizations that support the use of research evidence. Implementation Science. 2008, 3: 55-10.1186/1748-5908-3-55.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
go back to reference Moynihan R, Oxman AD, Lavis JN, Paulsen E: Evidence-Informed Health Policy: Using Research to Make Health Systems Healthier – Report from the Kunnskapssenteret (Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services), No. 1-2008. 2008, Oslo: Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services Moynihan R, Oxman AD, Lavis JN, Paulsen E: Evidence-Informed Health Policy: Using Research to Make Health Systems Healthier – Report from the Kunnskapssenteret (Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services), No. 1-2008. 2008, Oslo: Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services
5.
go back to reference Trostle J, Bronfman M, Langer A: How do researchers influence decision-makers? Case studies of Mexican policies. Health Policy and Planning. 1999, 14: 103-114. 10.1093/heapol/14.2.103.CrossRefPubMed Trostle J, Bronfman M, Langer A: How do researchers influence decision-makers? Case studies of Mexican policies. Health Policy and Planning. 1999, 14: 103-114. 10.1093/heapol/14.2.103.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Council on Health Research for Development (COHRED) Working Group on Research to Action and Policy: Lessons in Research to Action and Policy: Case Studies from Seven Countries. 2000, Geneva: Council on Health Research and Development Council on Health Research for Development (COHRED) Working Group on Research to Action and Policy: Lessons in Research to Action and Policy: Case Studies from Seven Countries. 2000, Geneva: Council on Health Research and Development
7.
go back to reference Lavis JN, Ross SE, Hurley JE, Hohenadel JM, Stoddart GL, Woodward CA, Abelson J: Examining the role of health services research in public policymaking. Milbank Quarterly. 2002, 80: 125-154. 10.1111/1468-0009.00005.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Lavis JN, Ross SE, Hurley JE, Hohenadel JM, Stoddart GL, Woodward CA, Abelson J: Examining the role of health services research in public policymaking. Milbank Quarterly. 2002, 80: 125-154. 10.1111/1468-0009.00005.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
go back to reference Aaserud M, Lewin S, Innvaer S, Paulsen EJ, Dahlgren AT, Trommald M, Duley L, Zwarenstein M, Oxman AD: Translating research into policy and practice in developing countries: A case study of magnesium sulphate for pre-eclampsia. BMC Health Services Research. 2005, 5: Aaserud M, Lewin S, Innvaer S, Paulsen EJ, Dahlgren AT, Trommald M, Duley L, Zwarenstein M, Oxman AD: Translating research into policy and practice in developing countries: A case study of magnesium sulphate for pre-eclampsia. BMC Health Services Research. 2005, 5:
9.
go back to reference Sevene E, Lewin S, Mariano A, Woelk G, Oxman AD, Matinhure S, Cliff J, Fernandes B, Daniels K: System and market failures: The unavailability of magnesium sulphate for the treatment of eclampsia and pre-eclampsia in Mozambique and Zimbabwe. British Medical Journal. 2005, 331: 765-769. 10.1136/bmj.331.7519.765.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Sevene E, Lewin S, Mariano A, Woelk G, Oxman AD, Matinhure S, Cliff J, Fernandes B, Daniels K: System and market failures: The unavailability of magnesium sulphate for the treatment of eclampsia and pre-eclampsia in Mozambique and Zimbabwe. British Medical Journal. 2005, 331: 765-769. 10.1136/bmj.331.7519.765.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
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. Social Science & Medicine. 2005, 61: 1291-1299. 10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.01.014.CrossRef 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. Social Science & Medicine. 2005, 61: 1291-1299. 10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.01.014.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Albert MA, Fretheim A, Maiga D: Factors influencing the utilization of research findings by heal policy-makers in a developing country: The selection of Mali's essential medicines. Health Research Policy and Systems. 2007, 5: 10.1186/1478-4505-5-2. Albert MA, Fretheim A, Maiga D: Factors influencing the utilization of research findings by heal policy-makers in a developing country: The selection of Mali's essential medicines. Health Research Policy and Systems. 2007, 5: 10.1186/1478-4505-5-2.
12.
go back to reference May C, Mort M, Williams T, Mair F, Gask L: Health technology assessment in its local contexts: Studies of telehealthcare. Social Science and Medicine. 2003, 57: 697-710. 10.1016/S0277-9536(02)00419-7.CrossRefPubMed May C, Mort M, Williams T, Mair F, Gask L: Health technology assessment in its local contexts: Studies of telehealthcare. Social Science and Medicine. 2003, 57: 697-710. 10.1016/S0277-9536(02)00419-7.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Rotstein D, Laupacis A: Differences between systematic reviews and health technology assessments: A trade-off between the ideals of scientific rigor and the realities of policy making. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. 2004, 20: 177-183. 10.1017/S0266462304000959.CrossRefPubMed Rotstein D, Laupacis A: Differences between systematic reviews and health technology assessments: A trade-off between the ideals of scientific rigor and the realities of policy making. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. 2004, 20: 177-183. 10.1017/S0266462304000959.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Hastings J, Adams EJ: Joint project of the international network of agencies for health technology assessment – Part 1: Survey results on diffusion, assessment, and clinical use of positron emission tomography. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. 2006, 22: 143-148. 10.1017/S026646230605094X.CrossRefPubMed Hastings J, Adams EJ: Joint project of the international network of agencies for health technology assessment – Part 1: Survey results on diffusion, assessment, and clinical use of positron emission tomography. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. 2006, 22: 143-148. 10.1017/S026646230605094X.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Perleth M, Busse R: Health technology assessment in Germany. Status, challenges, and development. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. 2000, 16: 412-428. 10.1017/S0266462300101072.CrossRefPubMed Perleth M, Busse R: Health technology assessment in Germany. Status, challenges, and development. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. 2000, 16: 412-428. 10.1017/S0266462300101072.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Gibis BR, Juzwishin D: Devolving healthcare delivery to regional health authorities: Is health technology assessment prepared to follow?. Healthcare Management Forum. 2003, 16: 24-31.CrossRefPubMed Gibis BR, Juzwishin D: Devolving healthcare delivery to regional health authorities: Is health technology assessment prepared to follow?. Healthcare Management Forum. 2003, 16: 24-31.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Hill S, Garattini S, van Loenhout J, O'Brien B, de Joncheere K: Technology Appraisal Programme of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence: A Review by WHO. 2003, Geneva: World Health Organization Hill S, Garattini S, van Loenhout J, O'Brien B, de Joncheere K: Technology Appraisal Programme of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence: A Review by WHO. 2003, Geneva: World Health Organization
18.
go back to reference Eskola J, Hockerstedt K, Makarainen H, Oxman A, Rehnqvist N, Lampe K: The Future of FinOHTA: An External Review. 2004, Helsinki: Stakes, 23 Eskola J, Hockerstedt K, Makarainen H, Oxman A, Rehnqvist N, Lampe K: The Future of FinOHTA: An External Review. 2004, Helsinki: Stakes, 23
19.
go back to reference Joncheere K, Hill S, Klazinga N, Makela M, Oxman AD: The Clinical Guideline Programme of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence: A Review by WHO. 2006, Geneva: World Health Organization Joncheere K, Hill S, Klazinga N, Makela M, Oxman AD: The Clinical Guideline Programme of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence: A Review by WHO. 2006, Geneva: World Health Organization
20.
go back to reference Innvaer S, Vist G, Trommald M, Oxman AD: Health policy-makers' perceptions of their use of evidence: A systematic review. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy. 2002, 7: 239-244. 10.1258/135581902320432778.CrossRefPubMed Innvaer S, Vist G, Trommald M, Oxman AD: Health policy-makers' perceptions of their use of evidence: A systematic review. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy. 2002, 7: 239-244. 10.1258/135581902320432778.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference 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. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy. 2005, 10: S1:35-S1:48. 10.1258/1355819054308549.CrossRef 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. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy. 2005, 10: S1:35-S1:48. 10.1258/1355819054308549.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Boyd EA, Bero LA: Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 4. Managing conflicts of interests. Health Res Policy Syst. 2006, 4: 16-10.1186/1478-4505-4-16.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Boyd EA, Bero LA: Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 4. Managing conflicts of interests. Health Res Policy Syst. 2006, 4: 16-10.1186/1478-4505-4-16.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
23.
go back to reference Oxman AD, Schunemann HJ, Fretheim A: Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 8. Synthesis and presentation of evidence. Health Res Policy Syst. 2006, 4: 20-10.1186/1478-4505-4-20.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Oxman AD, Schunemann HJ, Fretheim A: Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 8. Synthesis and presentation of evidence. Health Res Policy Syst. 2006, 4: 20-10.1186/1478-4505-4-20.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
24.
go back to reference Hamid M, Bustamante-Manaog T, Dung TV, Akkhavong K, Fu H, Ma Y, Zhong X, Salmela R, Panisset U, Pang T: EVIPNet: Translating the spirit of Mexico. Lancet. 2005, 366: 1758-1760. 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67709-4.CrossRefPubMed Hamid M, Bustamante-Manaog T, Dung TV, Akkhavong K, Fu H, Ma Y, Zhong X, Salmela R, Panisset U, Pang T: EVIPNet: Translating the spirit of Mexico. Lancet. 2005, 366: 1758-1760. 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67709-4.CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Oxman AD, Lavis JN, Fretheim A: Use of evidence in WHO recommendations. Lancet. 2007, 369: 1883-1889. 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60675-8.CrossRefPubMed Oxman AD, Lavis JN, Fretheim A: Use of evidence in WHO recommendations. Lancet. 2007, 369: 1883-1889. 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60675-8.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Evidence-informed health policy 4 – Case descriptions of organizations that support the use of research evidence
Authors
John N Lavis
Ray Moynihan
Andrew D Oxman
Elizabeth J Paulsen
Publication date
01-12-2008
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Implementation Science / Issue 1/2008
Electronic ISSN: 1748-5908
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-3-56

Other articles of this Issue 1/2008

Implementation Science 1/2008 Go to the issue