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

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Israel Journal of Health Policy Research
Published in: Israel Journal of Health Policy Research 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Perspective

Research in government and academia: the case of health policy

Authors: Sherry Glied, Raphael Wittenberg, Avi Israeli

Published in: Israel Journal of Health Policy Research | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Excerpt

Making effective health policy requires expert knowledge of an ever-changing technological, epidemiological, social, and economic context. One important vehicle for integrating expert research into the policy process is through linkages and exchanges between researchers and government officials [1]. Many governments respond to this need for expert knowledge by using advisory boards that include academics. Many also integrate academic health policy researchers more fully into policymaking by making them short-term or long-term employees. Each of us (Sherry Glied, Raphael Wittenberg and Avi Israeli) has spent some time as an academic and as a regular member of a governmental policy-making body, in the US, England, and Israel, respectively. In this paper, we reflect on the lessons learned from our dual perspectives. …
Literature
1.
Ellen M, Horowitz E, Vaknin S, Lavis JN. Views of health system policymakers on the role of research in health policymaking in Israel. Israel J Health Policy Res. 2016;5:24.
2.
3.
Graham ID, Tetroe J. CIHR research: how to translate health research knowledge into effective healthcare action. Healthcare Quarterly. 2007;10(3):20–2.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Guindon GE, Lavis JN, Becerra-Posada F, et al. Bridging the gaps between research, policy and practice in low-and middle-income countries: a survey of health care providers. Can Med Assoc J. 2010;182(9):E362–72.CrossRef
5.
Ellen M, Brown A. Transferring research from researchers to knowledge users: the importance of relationships and getting them right. Journal of health services research & policy. 2016;21(2):134–6.CrossRef
6.
Kogan M, Henkel M, Hanney S. Government and research: thirty years of evolution. Vol. 11. Dordrecht: Springer Science & Business Media; 2006.
7.
Nutley SM, Walter I, Davies HT. Using evidence: how research can inform public services. Bristol: Policy Press; 2007.CrossRef
8.
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 Serv Res. 2014;14(1):2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
9.
Ward V, Smith S, House A, Hamer S. Exploring knowledge exchange: a useful framework for practice and policy. Soc Sci Med. 2012;74(3):297–304.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Lomas J, Brown AD. Research and advice giving: a functional view of evidence-informed policy advice in a Canadian Ministry of Health. Milbank Q. 2009;87(4):903–26.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
Coburn AF. The role of health services research in developing state health policy. Health Aff. 1998;17(1):139–51.CrossRef
12.
Lomas J. Using'linkage and exchange'to move research into policy at a Canadian foundation. Health Aff. 2000;19(3):236–40.CrossRef
13.
Mitton C, Adair CE, McKenzie E, Patten SB, Perry BW. Knowledge transfer and exchange: review and synthesis of the literature. The Milbank Quarterly. 2007;85(4):729–68.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
Weiss CH. The many meanings of research utilization. Public Adm Rev. 1979;39(5):426–31.CrossRef
15.
Shapiro P. Government Dept. Terminates Kissinger's Extended Leave. The Harvard Crimson. 1973;6:1973.
16.
Gray BH, Gusmano MK, Collins SR. AHCPR and the changing politics of health services research. Health Affairs-Millwood VA Then Bethesda MA. 2003;22(3; SUPP):W3–283.
17.
Gray BH, Gusmano MK, Collins SR. AHCPR and the changing politics of health services research. Health Aff. 2003;Suppl Web Exclusives:W3-283-307.
18.
Smee C. Speaking truth to power: two decades of analysis in the Department of Health. Oxford: Radcliffe Publishing; 2005.
19.
Goplerud EN. Consistency of Large Employer and Group Health Plan Benefits with Requirements of the Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addition Equity Act of 2008. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services, Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, Office of Disability, Aging and Long-Term Care Policy; 2013.
20.
Ridgely MS, Pacula RL, Burnam MA. Short-term analysis to support mental health and substance use disorder parity implementation. Washington, DC: HHS (US Department of Health and Human Services) Office of the Assistance Secretary for Planning and Evaluation; 2012.
21.
Veugelers R, Wang J. Novel science for industry? Available at SSRN 2710569. 2015.
22.
Wang J, Veugelers R, Stephan P. Bias against novelty in science: a cautionary tale for users of bibliometric indicators. 2015.
23.
Kuhn TS. The structure of scientific revolutions: Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 2012.CrossRef
24.
Jefferson T, Rudin M, Brodney Folse S, Davidoff F. Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;2:MR000016.
25.
Skopec L, Henderson A, Todd S, Yong PL. Essential Health Benefits: Comparing Benefits in Small Group Products and State and Federal Employee Plans. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services, Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation; 2011.
26.
Skopee L. Essential health benefits: comparing benefits in small group products and state and Federal Employee Plans. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services, Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation; 2011.
27.
Wittenberg R, Hu B, Hancock R, et al. Projections of demand for and costs of social care for older people in England, 2010 to 2030, under current and alternative funding systems. 2011.
28.
Forder J, Fernández J-L. Analysing the costs and benefits of social care funding arrangements in England: technical report. Report to the Department of Health, PSSRU Discussion Paper; 2009. p. 2644.
29.
Mayes R. The origins, development, and passage of Medicare’s revolutionary prospective payment system. J Hist Med Allied Sci. 2007;62(1):21–55.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Fetter RB, Shin Y, Freeman JL, Averill RF, Thompson JD. Case mix definition by diagnosis-related groups. Med Care. 1980;18(2):i–53.
31.
Dowling WL. Prospective reimbursement of hospitals. Inquiry. 1974;11(3):163–80.PubMed
32.
Newhouse JP, Group RCIE. Free for all?: lessons from the RAND health insurance experiment. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1993.
33.
Manning WG, Newhouse JP, Duan N, Keeler EB, Leibowitz A. Health insurance and the demand for medical care: evidence from a randomized experiment. Am Econ Rev. 1987;77(3):251–77.PubMed
34.
Vaganay A. Evidence-based policy or policy-based evidence? The effect of policy commitment on government-sponsored evaluation in Britain (1997-2010), London School of Economics and Political Science; 2014.
35.
36.
Peterson MA. In the shadow of politics: the pathways of research evidence to health policy making. J Health Polit Policy Law. 2018;43(3):341–76.CrossRef
37.
Hawkins B, Parkhurst J. The'good governance'of evidence in health policy. Evidence & policy: a journal of research, debate and practice. 2016;12(4):575–92.CrossRef
38.
Brunsson N. The organization of hypocrisy: talk, decisions and actions in organizations. Chichester: Wiley; 1989.
39.
Boswell C, Smith K. Rethinking policy ‘impact’: four models of research-policy relations. Palgrave Communications. 2017;3(1):44.CrossRef
40.
Parkhurst J. The politics of evidence: from evidence-based policy to the good governance of evidence. New York: Routledge; 2017.
41.
42.
Contandriopoulos D, Lemire M, DENIS JL, Tremblay É. Knowledge exchange processes in organizations and policy arenas: a narrative systematic review of the literature. The Milbank Quarterly. 2010;88(4):444–83.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
43.
Cairney P, Oliver K. Evidence-based policymaking is not like evidence-based medicine, so how far should you go to bridge the divide between evidence and policy? Health research policy and systems. 2017;15(1):35.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
44.
Glied S. Policy analysis in government and academia: two cultures. J Health Polit Policy Law. 2018;43(3):537–42.CrossRef
45.
Metadata
Title
Research in government and academia: the case of health policy
Authors
Sherry Glied
Raphael Wittenberg
Avi Israeli
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Israel Journal of Health Policy Research / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 2045-4015
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13584-018-0230-3

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Israel Journal of Health Policy Research 1/2018 Go to the issue

Original research article

Patient demands for ethnic–based separation in public hospitals in Israel: patients’ and practitioners’ perspectives

Original research article

Should we use Palivizumab immunoprophylaxis for infants against respiratory syncytial virus? – a cost-utility analysis

Commentary

Curriculum reform: Why? What? How? and how will we know it works?

Original research article

The influence of an accredited pediatric emergency medicine program on the management of pediatric pain and anxiety

Commentary

Antenatal anaesthesia clinics – the way forward?

Original research article

Violations of workers’ rights and exposure to work-related abuse of live-in migrant and live-out local home care workers – a preliminary study: implications for health policy and practice