Evidence & Policy最新文献

{"title":"Knowledge translation platforms to support African evidence-informed policies: challenges and progress","authors":"J. Adu, Sebastian Gyamfi, E. Martin-Yeboah","doi":"10.1332/174426421X16123456824061","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/174426421X16123456824061","url":null,"abstract":"Background: An effective health system that ensures availability and access to quality healthcare produces active human capital. Responsive health systems are the results of evidence-informed policy practice which is mostly seen in advanced countries. Deficiencies in most African health systems are due to the ineffective use of health research to reinforce public health policymaking.Key points for discussion: This paper discusses the progress and challenges faced by Knowledge Translation Platforms (KTPs) in African evidence-informed policymaking among healthcare systems. Large gaps exist between research evidence and policymaking in Africa due to inefficiencies of the KTPs and the lack of political will to use sound ethical research outcomes to inform health policies. Activities of KTPs in Africa are most often curtailed by many obstacles, but not limited to the following; lack of infrastructure, human and financial capital, high turnover among top-level policymakers, and lack of collaboration between academia and industry.Conclusions and implications: Evidence informed policymaking is crucial to the achievement of the health-related Sustainable Development Goals by 2030.Key messagesThere is the need for effective translation of scientific knowledge into action where health systems could interrelate closely with health research organisations to create and use available evidence to ensure quality health outcomes in developing nations, including Africa. KTPs are essential players in making this a reality in Africa.","PeriodicalId":51652,"journal":{"name":"Evidence & Policy","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66285272","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Exploring a non-universal understanding of waged work and its consequences: sketching out employment activation for people with an intellectual disability","authors":"Kim Dearing","doi":"10.1332/174426421X16140992285741","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/174426421X16140992285741","url":null,"abstract":"Background: Supported Employment has been advocated for by successive governments and policymakers alike as the best approach to employment inclusion for people with an intellectual disability who are in receipt of social care. Yet only 5.2% of this demographic are in any form of work and these numbers have been persistently stagnant for many years.Aims: This study aimed to explore the employment landscape and grapple with the intersecting layers of policy consequence for people who have an intellectual disability, and are in receipt of social care, who wish to engage with work preparation employment support.Methods: As an active participant in the field, this study was ethnographic and conducted at a new job club that had been established in England. In addition, three further sites of complementary data were explored in Wales, through interviews and focus groups.Findings: This study demonstrates that there is a mismatch between how evidence informs policy, and how funding is allocated to support with work preparation. Those unable to secure Supported Employment services are, instead, navigating extreme employment disadvantage and scant opportunities, in the open labour market. Further, bound up in this analysis is evidence of a non-universal understanding of waged work where any form of financial remuneration is welcome.Discussion and conclusion: Overall, with a mismatch between evidence that informs policy, policy rhetoric, realistic employment prospects, and available work, without a fundamental employment policy shift, the very low employment rates within this demographic will not increase.","PeriodicalId":51652,"journal":{"name":"Evidence & Policy","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66285457","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Taking a policy process approach to illuminate the political nature of disability policymaking","authors":"Leanne S. Giordono","doi":"10.1332/174426421X16145933430109","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/174426421X16145933430109","url":null,"abstract":"Background: In an era of increased polarisation, identity politics and growing reliance on using evidence to make disability policy decisions ‐ evidence-based policymaking ‐ how much do we know about the process by which disability policy decisions are made and the use of evidence therein?Aims and objectives: The objective of this Practice Paper is to introduce key policy process frameworks, highlight connections between models of disability and the policy process, and identify opportunities for disability scholars, analysts and advocates to use a policy process approach.Key conclusions: Wider use of policy process frameworks can enhance our understanding of the political nature of the disability policy decision-making process and conditions that influence how evidence is used to inform disability policy.","PeriodicalId":51652,"journal":{"name":"Evidence & Policy","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66285758","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Epistemological deliberation: the challenges of producing evidence-based guidelines on lifestyle habits","authors":"H. Lagerlöf, T. Zuiderent-Jerak, M. Sager","doi":"10.1332/174426421X16149619907286","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/174426421X16149619907286","url":null,"abstract":"Background: Promotion of healthy behaviour is increasingly highlighted worldwide as a way to improve public health, prevent disease incidence, and decrease long-term costs for healthcare. In Sweden the National Board of Health and Welfare (NBHW) used the well-established format of national guidelines to facilitate a more widespread use of approaches for promotion of healthy lifestyle habits in healthcare.Aims and objectives: The aim of this case study was to explore the tensions between public health knowledge and the tenets of evidence-based medicine (EBM) in the creation of national guidelines on lifestyle habits.Methods: Based on data from interviews with guideline professionals and the collected documents of the national guidelines, we examine how NBHW negotiated the conflicts between public health knowledge and the format of national guidelines. An analytical model based on approaches from the sociology of standardisation is used to explore the ramifications of these negotiations.Findings: In line with findings in the sociology of standardisation, we show how conflicts between public health knowledge and the format of national guidelines result in both having to yield on certain points. This, we claim, results in compromise, but perhaps also compromised notions of validity and causality.Discussion and conclusion: This case offers important learning about the general compatibility of public health and currently dominant methods of EBM. Important crossroads are outlined, concerning how validity and causality are configured in public health guidelines and how these require extensive epistemological deliberation.Key messagesEpistemological commitments on validity and causality within public health have been compromised to fit the format of national guidelines;Similarly, the format of national guidelines has been subordinated to the public health valuation of risk assessments;Integrating public health into an EBM format requires extensive epistemological deliberation.","PeriodicalId":51652,"journal":{"name":"Evidence & Policy","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66286337","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Using evidence in shaping disability policy in Romania: the case of sheltered workshops","authors":"Claudia Petrescu, Mihaela Lambru","doi":"10.1332/174426421X16146970604672","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/174426421X16146970604672","url":null,"abstract":"Background: The importance of using evidence to inform the policymaking process has been well established in the literature and practice. In Western countries evidence-based policy (EBP) is already accepted and implemented in many policy areas, including disability policy. In Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) the interest in EBP (evidence-based policy) is new and limited, hampered in many aspects by the regional specificity of the public administration and welfare services reform.Aims and objectives: The present article aims to explore the development of evidence-based disability employment policy in Romania, in a specific area of work integration: sheltered workshops.Methods: The article draws on the findings of extensive research on sheltered workshops that included multiple research methods, such as public policy analysis, social documents analysis, and secondary data analysis of quantitative and qualitative data.Findings: A number of issues concerning the implementation of evidence-based disability policy in Romania have been identified. Some of these issues are related to the administrative and policy capacity of the government. Others are linked to the limitation of the advocacy capacity of Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) active in the disability area, or to the weak presence of the academic/research community in the disability policy forum.Discussion and conclusions: There is a limited knowledge of how evidence-based disability policy is developed in CEE countries. This article will emphasise the role of the sheltered workshops in shaping the policy solutions in the area of work integration for persons with disabilities. The article will contribute to better understanding of the disability policy reform, looking closely at how the evidence is built and used within the disability policy process.","PeriodicalId":51652,"journal":{"name":"Evidence & Policy","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66286370","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"When evidence alone is not enough: the problem, policy and politics of water fluoridation in England","authors":"G. Lowery, M. Flinders, B. Gibson","doi":"10.1332/174426420X16079614941921","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/174426420X16079614941921","url":null,"abstract":"Background: Tooth extractions are the most common cause of hospital admissions for children in England. Water fluoridation has the potential to reduce this number by 60%, is backed by the scientific and public health communities, and yet is currently consumed by only 10% of the population.Aims and objectives: This ‘evidence-policy gap’ is explored through Kingdon’s ‘multi-streams approach’ which provides insights into the circumstances under which water fluoridation has made it onto the political agenda, the rationale underpinning opponent and advocate policy positions, and the role of the political arena in fostering or hindering policy action.Methods: Over 100 primary documents were reviewed to develop an understanding of the scientific and ethical arguments for and against water fluoridation, as well as to identify how they have all historically sought to mobilise their policy preferences. Eleven consultations were also conducted with stakeholders as part of the knowledge exchange process.Findings: The key finding of this research is that evidence is only likely to trigger policy change if it emerges into a receptive sociopolitical context. In substantiating this claim we identify evidence not of an ‘evidence-policy gap’ but of a more complex and multidimensional ‘evidence-policy-politics gap’.Discussion and conclusions: The findings contribute to a range of debates in relation to: (1) the apparent irreconcilability of background ideas about what ought to form the basis of public health policymaking; (2) the presence of differing evidential standards that create an uneven playing field; and (3) the central underpinning role of politics in public health policymaking.","PeriodicalId":51652,"journal":{"name":"Evidence & Policy","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66285163","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Drawing hidden figures of disability: youth and adults with disabilities in Canada","authors":"M. Prince","doi":"10.1332/174426421X16146827140135","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/174426421X16146827140135","url":null,"abstract":"Background: While governments draw on survey data to inform policy choices, the design, application, and interpretation of surveys can generate certain images of disability and ignore many others. Aims and objectives: This article draws attention to social circumstances of people with disabilities often unacknowledged in research evidence: hidden figures of disability. Methods: Selected results from the Canadian Survey on Disability are examined with a focus on working-age youth and adults (aged 15 to 64) with a range of disabilities. Findings: Five figures of disability and corresponding conceptual models are identified. These hidden figures of disability are the uncounted, those with needs unsupported, youth in multiple transitions, potential workers, and what may be called 'the fearful'. Several models of disability are identified intersecting with the evidence. These are the absent citizen, biomedical model and charitable model, social and economic integration model, human rights and full citizenship, and psycho-emotional model of affective disablism and ableism. Discussion: Hidden figures of disability are more than statistical tests and texts;more than calculations derived from quantitative research where people become a data point.The function of drawing hidden figures is to disclose and describe the bodily experiences of people with disabilities in their social positions and structural contexts. Conclusion: We need to see the production of evidence for policy not as painting a portrait but as portraits in the plural, and appreciate not only what is in the frame but also what faces and forms of knowledge get glossed over or brushed aside.","PeriodicalId":51652,"journal":{"name":"Evidence & Policy","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66285904","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Ignoring evidence, producing inequities: public policies, disability and the case of Kaiowá and Guarani Indigenous children with disabilities in Brazil","authors":"Rayanne de Sales Lima, Andréa Borghi Moreira Jacinto, Rodrigo Arthuso Arantes Faria","doi":"10.1332/174426421X16147039138899","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/174426421X16147039138899","url":null,"abstract":"Backround: An inter-institutional task force was brought together in 2018 to evaluate the irregular institutionalisation of Guarani and Kaiowá Indigenous children with disabilities in Dourados, in central-western Brazil.Aims and objectives: We draw on this case study to undertake a ‘situational analysis’ on the existence/absence and the use/non-use of evidence in the evaluation of public policies regarding Indigenous children with disabilities. By critically analysing concrete practices in the context of multilevel intersectoral dialogue and joint action of state bodies and civil society, we aim to highlight the effective and potential gains from using Culturally Appropriate Evidence (CAE) at the intersection of policies on children, Indigenous peoples and people with disabilities.Methods: We used a case study approach to analyse the precedents, development and ramifications of the task force, examine the legal framework regulating the rights of Indigenous children with disabilities, and describe the process of institutionalisation of Indigenous children in the Dourados region in the first two decades of the 21st century.Findings: We identified that inter-institutional and intersectoral collaboration enhances the development of CAE and the instrumentalisation of intersectoral alternatives.Discussion and conclusions: Although entrenched institutional bureaucratic culture, and the absence of mechanisms for participation and consultation with Indigenous peoples, can create obstacles to the formulation and use of these kinds of evidence in public policies, the production of evidence through the articulated and collaborative effort of agents can offer, when there are political conditions for it, the necessary conditions to develop culturally appropriate solutions for complex scenarios.","PeriodicalId":51652,"journal":{"name":"Evidence & Policy","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66286108","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Principles and related strategies for spinal cord injury research partnership approaches: a qualitative study","authors":"F. Hoekstra, H. Gainforth","doi":"10.1332/174426421X16161715996124","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/174426421X16161715996124","url":null,"abstract":"Background: Conducting and/or disseminating research in partnership with potential research users is a popular approach to conducting useful and relevant research. Despite calls for guidance to support these research partnerships, evidence-based tools and resources remain limited.Aims and objectives: This study aimed to explore principles and related strategies for conducting and/or disseminating spinal cord injury (SCI) research in partnership with the SCI community, in order to gain insight into ways to support SCI research partnerships.This qualitative study included ten semi-structured interviews with SCI research partnership champions. The interviews focused on participants’ experiences with SCI research projects that are conducted or disseminated in partnership, and related principles and strategies to work in research partnerships.Participants mainly talked about principles related to: (1) the relationship between researchers and research users (for example, respect each other, avoid tokenism); (2) co-production of knowledge (for example, research user engagement early and throughout); and (3) meaningful engagement (for example, allowing flexibility). Examples of related strategies included attending collaborative conferences, research user engagement in refinement of research questions, training in research methods, and hiring people with SCI as part of the research team.Key conclusions: This qualitative study presents research partnership principles (norms) and related strategies (observable actions). This study can provide guidance for other researchers and research users who want to engage in (SCI) research partnerships. The findings of this study could be used to inform the development of evidence-based tools and resources to support future research partnerships.Key messagesWe provide guidance for researchers and research users to engage in research partnerships;The guidance includes research partnership principles (norms) and related strategies (observable actions);Linking strategies to principles may help researchers and their partners to engage in research partnerships;This study can support the use of research partnership principles within a research system.","PeriodicalId":51652,"journal":{"name":"Evidence & Policy","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66286359","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"From dissemination to engagement: learning over time from a national research intermediary centre (Four Fs)","authors":"T. Lamont, E. Maxwell","doi":"10.1332/174426421x16323393555059","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/174426421x16323393555059","url":null,"abstract":"Background: There has been little applied learning from organisations engaged in making evidence useful for decision makers. More focus has been given either to the work of individuals as knowledge brokers or to theoretical frameworks on embedding evidence. More intelligence is needed on the practice of knowledge intermediation.Aims and objectives: This paper describes the evolution of approaches by one UK Centre to promote and embed evidence in health and care services. This is not a formal evaluation, given the lack of critical distance by authors who led work at the Centre, but a reflective analysis which may be helpful for other evidence intermediary bodies.Conclusions: We analyse the founding conditions and theoretical context at the start of our activity and describe four activities we developed over time. These were filter (screening research for relevance and quality); forge (engaging stakeholders in interpreting evidence); fuse (knowledge brokering with hybrid teams); and fulfil (sustained interaction with implementation partners). We reflect on the tensions between rigour and relevance in the evidence we shared and the way in which our approaches evolved from a programme of evidence outputs to greater focus on sustained engagement and deliberative activities to make sense of evidence and reach wider audiences. Over the lifetime of the Centre, we moved from linear and relational modes towards systems type approaches to embed and mobilise evidence.Key messagesThere is little shared learning on the practice of evidence use by knowledge intermediaries.Our account of a national evidence centre for health decision makers shows the shift towards more engaged and embedded approaches.We identify four central activities – filter, forge, fuse and fulfil – and how they evolved over time.We note the value of sustained engagement with stakeholders in shaping new evidence narratives relevant to practice.","PeriodicalId":51652,"journal":{"name":"Evidence & Policy","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66286671","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}