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
Implementation Science
Published in: Implementation Science 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Systematic review

Barriers and facilitators to uptake of systematic reviews by policy makers and health care managers: a scoping review

Authors: Andrea C. Tricco, Roberta Cardoso, Sonia M. Thomas, Sanober Motiwala, Shannon Sullivan, Michael R. Kealey, Brenda Hemmelgarn, Mathieu Ouimet, Michael P. Hillmer, Laure Perrier, Sasha Shepperd, Sharon E. Straus

Published in: Implementation Science | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

We completed a scoping review on the barriers and facilitators to use of systematic reviews by health care managers and policy makers, including consideration of format and content, to develop recommendations for systematic review authors and to inform research efforts to develop and test formats for systematic reviews that may optimise their uptake.

Methods

We used the Arksey and O’Malley approach for our scoping review. Electronic databases (e.g., MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo) were searched from inception until September 2014. Any study that identified barriers or facilitators (including format and content features) to uptake of systematic reviews by health care managers and policy makers/analysts was eligible for inclusion. Two reviewers independently screened the literature results and abstracted data from the relevant studies. The identified barriers and facilitators were charted using a barriers and facilitators taxonomy for implementing clinical practice guidelines by clinicians.

Results

We identified useful information for authors of systematic reviews to inform their preparation of reviews including providing one-page summaries with key messages, tailored to the relevant audience. Moreover, partnerships between researchers and policy makers/managers to facilitate the conduct and use of systematic reviews should be considered to enhance relevance of reviews and thereby influence uptake.

Conclusions

Systematic review authors can consider our results when publishing their systematic reviews. These strategies should be rigorously evaluated to determine impact on use of reviews in decision-making.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Cook DJ, Mulrow CD, Haynes RB. Systematic reviews: synthesis of best evidence for clinical decisions. Ann Intern Med. 1997;126(5):376–80.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Antman EM, Lau J, Kupelnick B, Mosteller F, Chalmers TC. A comparison of results of meta-analyses of randomized control trials and recommendations of clinical experts. Treatments for myocardial infarction. JAMA. 1992;268(2):240–8.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Grimshaw JM, Santesso N, Cumpston M, Mayhew A, McGowan J. Knowledge for knowledge translation: the role of the Cochrane Collaboration. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2006;26(1):55–62. doi:10.​1002/​chp.​51.PubMedCrossRef
4.
5.
6.
7.
J. L. Knowledge utilization. What is it? Knowledge: creation, diffusion, utilization. 1980;1:421–42.
8.
Dunn WN. Measuring knowledge use. Knowledge: Creation, diffusion, utilization. 1983;5:120–33.
9.
CH W. The many meanings of research utilization. Public Administration Rev. 1979:426–31.
10.
Beyer JM, Trice HM. The utilization process: a conceptual framework and synthesis of empirical findings. Admin Sci. 1982;27:591–622.CrossRef
11.
Estabrooks CA. The conceptual structure of research utilization. Res Nurs Health. 1999;22:203–16.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Straus S, Tetroe J, Graham I. Knowledge translation in health care. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell, BMJ Books; 2013.CrossRef
13.
14.
Lavis JN, Ross SE, Hurley JE, Hohenadel JM, Stoddart GL, Woodward CA, et al. Examining the role of health services research in public policymaking. Milbank Q. 2002;80(1):125–54.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
15.
16.
Grol R. Successes and failures in the implementation of evidence-based guidelines for clinical practice. Med Care. 2001;39(8 Suppl 2):II46–54.PubMed
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
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. Can J Nurs Res. 1999;31(1):23–36.PubMed
22.
Dobbins M, Cockerill R, Barnsley J. Factors affecting the utilization of systematic reviews. A study of public health decision makers. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2001;17(2):203–14.PubMedCrossRef
23.
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. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2001;17(4):467–78.PubMed
24.
25.
Wallace J, Byrne C, Clarke M. Improving the uptake of systematic reviews: a systematic review of intervention effectiveness and relevance. BMJ Open. 2014;4(10). doi:10.​1136/​bmjopen-2014-005834.
26.
Murthy L, Shepperd S, Clarke MJ, Garner SE, Lavis JN, Perrier L, et al. Interventions to improve the use of systematic reviews in decision-making by health system managers, policy makers and clinicians. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;9:CD009401. doi:10.​1002/​14651858.​CD009401.​pub2.PubMed
27.
28.
29.
Wallace J, Nwosu B, Clarke M. Barriers to the uptake of evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses: a systematic review of decision makers’ perceptions. BMJ Open. 2012;2(5). doi:10.​1136/​bmjopen-2012-001220.
30.
31.
Dobbins M, Thomas H, O’Brien MA, Duggan M. Use of systematic reviews in the development of new provincial public health policies in Ontario. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2004;20(4):399–404.PubMedCrossRef
32.
33.
34.
35.
Synthesi.SR. KT Program, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael’s Hospital., Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 2014.
36.
Cabana MD, Rand CS, Powe NR, Wu AW, Wilson MH, Abboud PA, et al. Why don’t physicians follow clinical practice guidelines? A framework for improvement. JAMA. 1999;282(15):1458–65.PubMedCrossRef
37.
NVivo qualitative data analysis software; QSR International Pty Ltd. Version 10, 2012. .
38.
39.
Armstrong R, Pettman T, Burford B, Doyle J, Waters E. Tracking and understanding the utility of Cochrane reviews for public health decision-making. J Public Health (Oxf). 2012;34(2):309–13. doi:10.​1093/​pubmed/​fds038.CrossRef
40.
Atack L, Gignac P, Anderson M. Getting the right information to the table: using technology to support evidence-based decision making. Healthc Manage Forum. 2010;23(4):164–8.PubMedCrossRef
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
Suter E, Armitage GD. Use of a knowledge synthesis by decision makers and planners to facilitate system level integration in a large Canadian provincial health authority. Int J Integr Care. 2011;11:e011.PubMedPubMedCentral
50.
Vogel JP, Oxman AD, Glenton C, Rosenbaum S, Lewin S, Gulmezoglu AM, et al. Policymakers’ and other stakeholders’ perceptions of key considerations for health system decisions and the presentation of evidence to inform those considerations: an international survey. Health Res Policy Syst. 2013;11:19. doi:10.​1186/​1478-4505-11-19.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
51.
52.
Packer C, Hyde C. Does providing timely access to and advice on existing reviews of research influence health authority purchasing? Public Health Med. 2000;2(1):20–4.
53.
54.
Wye L, Brangan E, Cameron A, Gabbay J, Klein J, Pope C. Health services and delivery research. Knowledge exchange in health-care commissioning: case studies of the use of commercial, not-for-profit and public sector agencies, 2011–14. Southampton: NIHR Journals Library; 2015.
55.
56.
57.
58.
Straus SERW, Glasziou P, Haynes RB. Evidence-based medicine: how to practice and teach EBM. 4th ed. London: Churchill Livingstone; 2010.
59.
Oliver K, Innvar S, Lorenc T, Woodman J, Thomas J. A systematic review of barriers to and facilitators of the use of evidence by policymakers. BMC Health Services Research. 2014;14(1).
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
Metadata
Title
Barriers and facilitators to uptake of systematic reviews by policy makers and health care managers: a scoping review
Authors
Andrea C. Tricco
Roberta Cardoso
Sonia M. Thomas
Sanober Motiwala
Shannon Sullivan
Michael R. Kealey
Brenda Hemmelgarn
Mathieu Ouimet
Michael P. Hillmer
Laure Perrier
Sasha Shepperd
Sharon E. Straus
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Implementation Science / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1748-5908
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-016-0370-1

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

Implementation Science 1/2015 Go to the issue

Debate

Developing the ethics of implementation research in health

Research

Understanding the dynamics of the Seguro Popular de Salud policy implementation in Mexico from a complex adaptive systems perspective

Study protocol

iLead—a transformational leadership intervention to train healthcare managers’ implementation leadership

Study protocol

A mixed methods protocol to evaluate the effect and cost-effectiveness of an Integrated electronic Diagnosis Approach (IeDA) for the management of childhood illnesses at primary health facilities in Burkina Faso

Research

The impact of leadership hubs on the uptake of evidence-informed nursing practices and workplace policies for HIV care: a quasi-experimental study in Jamaica, Kenya, Uganda and South Africa

Study protocol

An effectiveness-implementation hybrid trial study protocol targeting posttraumatic stress disorder and comorbidity