A Rapid Evidence Support System Assessment (RESSA) of health policymaking in Ireland - A Protocol.

HRB open research Pub Date : 2025-06-23 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.12688/hrbopenres.14167.1
Barbara Whelan, Marie Tierney, Nikita N Burke, K M Saif-Ur-Rahman, Caitriona Creely, Trudy Duffy, Catherine Gill, Mary Horgan, John N Lavis, Teresa Maguire, Mairead O'Driscoll, John O'Neill, Kerry Waddell, Declan Devane
{"title":"A Rapid Evidence Support System Assessment (RESSA) of health policymaking in Ireland - A Protocol.","authors":"Barbara Whelan, Marie Tierney, Nikita N Burke, K M Saif-Ur-Rahman, Caitriona Creely, Trudy Duffy, Catherine Gill, Mary Horgan, John N Lavis, Teresa Maguire, Mairead O'Driscoll, John O'Neill, Kerry Waddell, Declan Devane","doi":"10.12688/hrbopenres.14167.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Evidence-informed policymaking promotes the use of the best available evidence in a systematic and transparent manner to guide policy decisions. It aims to ensure that policies are grounded in credible and relevant evidence while also considering factors such as feasibility, sustainability, equity, and stakeholder input. The Global Evidence Commission has emphasised the necessity for stronger national evidence infrastructures and recommended that governments evaluate their evidence-support systems, focusing on the demand for evidence from policymakers, the supply of timely and relevant evidence, and the coordination between the two. To assist countries in reviewing their evidence-support systems, the Global Commission on Evidence to Address Societal Challenges developed the Rapid Evidence Support System Assessment (RESSA). Here, we outline the protocol for a RESSA of health policymaking being conducted in Ireland.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study will adopt a flexible, mixed-methods design with four key stages: (1) a high-level website review, (2) an in-depth document review, (3) semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders, and (4) seeking feedback. For the document review, the data analysis and synthesis process will follow the READ approach, allowing for a systematic way to organise, interpret, and synthesise the information extracted from the selected documents. Interview data will be analysed using a thematic approach. Findings from both sources will be triangulated to ensure robust conclusions about the strengths and challenges of the evidence-support system for health policymaking.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This protocol outlines the methods for assessing Ireland's evidence support system for health policymaking. By documenting our approach in detail, we aim to enhance transparency and replicability, providing a foundation for easier comparison and contrast with similar assessments conducted by other groups. While this study focuses on health, the methodology and findings may also inform evidence-support systems in other sectors, such as climate and education.</p>","PeriodicalId":73254,"journal":{"name":"HRB open research","volume":"8 ","pages":"70"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12368487/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HRB open research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.14167.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Evidence-informed policymaking promotes the use of the best available evidence in a systematic and transparent manner to guide policy decisions. It aims to ensure that policies are grounded in credible and relevant evidence while also considering factors such as feasibility, sustainability, equity, and stakeholder input. The Global Evidence Commission has emphasised the necessity for stronger national evidence infrastructures and recommended that governments evaluate their evidence-support systems, focusing on the demand for evidence from policymakers, the supply of timely and relevant evidence, and the coordination between the two. To assist countries in reviewing their evidence-support systems, the Global Commission on Evidence to Address Societal Challenges developed the Rapid Evidence Support System Assessment (RESSA). Here, we outline the protocol for a RESSA of health policymaking being conducted in Ireland.

Methods: This study will adopt a flexible, mixed-methods design with four key stages: (1) a high-level website review, (2) an in-depth document review, (3) semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders, and (4) seeking feedback. For the document review, the data analysis and synthesis process will follow the READ approach, allowing for a systematic way to organise, interpret, and synthesise the information extracted from the selected documents. Interview data will be analysed using a thematic approach. Findings from both sources will be triangulated to ensure robust conclusions about the strengths and challenges of the evidence-support system for health policymaking.

Conclusions: This protocol outlines the methods for assessing Ireland's evidence support system for health policymaking. By documenting our approach in detail, we aim to enhance transparency and replicability, providing a foundation for easier comparison and contrast with similar assessments conducted by other groups. While this study focuses on health, the methodology and findings may also inform evidence-support systems in other sectors, such as climate and education.

爱尔兰卫生政策制定的快速证据支持系统评估(RESSA) -协议。
背景:循证决策促进以系统和透明的方式使用现有的最佳证据来指导决策。它旨在确保政策以可信和相关的证据为基础,同时也考虑到可行性、可持续性、公平性和利益相关者的投入等因素。全球证据委员会强调了加强国家证据基础设施的必要性,并建议各国政府评估其证据支持系统,重点关注决策者对证据的需求、及时和相关证据的提供以及两者之间的协调。为协助各国审查其证据支持系统,应对社会挑战全球证据委员会制定了快速证据支持系统评估(RESSA)。在这里,我们概述了爱尔兰正在进行的卫生政策制定RESSA的议定书。方法:本研究将采用灵活的混合方法设计,分为四个关键阶段:(1)高水平的网站审查,(2)深入的文件审查,(3)与关键利益相关者的半结构化访谈,以及(4)寻求反馈。对于文件审查,数据分析和综合过程将遵循READ方法,允许以系统的方式组织、解释和综合从选定文件中提取的信息。访谈数据将采用专题方法进行分析。将对两种来源的调查结果进行三角分析,以确保就卫生政策制定的证据支持系统的优势和挑战得出强有力的结论。结论:本协议概述了评估爱尔兰卫生政策制定证据支持系统的方法。通过详细记录我们的方法,我们的目标是提高透明度和可复制性,为更容易与其他小组进行的类似评估进行比较和对比提供基础。虽然这项研究的重点是卫生,但其方法和结果也可为气候和教育等其他部门的证据支持系统提供信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信