加拿大公共卫生领域的循证决策:定性探索。

IF 2.7 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Isabella Romano, Emily C Clark, Janine Quiambao, Miranda Horn, Lynn Dare, Kristin Rogers, Maureen Dobbins
{"title":"加拿大公共卫生领域的循证决策:定性探索。","authors":"Isabella Romano, Emily C Clark, Janine Quiambao, Miranda Horn, Lynn Dare, Kristin Rogers, Maureen Dobbins","doi":"10.1097/XEB.0000000000000454","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Evidence-informed decision-making (EIDM) plays a vital role in public health practice. Canada has invested in support for evidence-informed approaches in public health. Despite growing expectations for EIDM, evidence integration has not been thoroughly evaluated.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study explores EIDM within Canadian public health organizations before the COVID-19 pandemic. A secondary objective is to explore how EIDM in public health was affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using a qualitative descriptive approach, data were collected and analyzed from interviews with public health professionals across Canada.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From interviews with 20 participants in four Canadian provinces and one territory, all participants noted that EIDM was valued, but there was considerable variation in implementation. Participants reported differences in consistency of evidence use, resources available at their public health organizations to support EIDM, and staff knowledge and skills in EIDM. Leadership emerged as a strong influencer of EIDM; however, leadership investment in EIDM varied. Changes in evidence use during the COVID-19 pandemic revealed an urgency for decision-making amidst an influx of evidence and reallocated staff roles.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite gains in the recognized value of EIDM, gaps remain in the integration of evidence into decision-making and adequate resource investment to support EIDM. Time, resources, and skills to adapt processes and implement EIDM are needed for public health organizations in Canada to fully integrate EIDM into all aspects of public health decision-making.</p><p><strong>Spanish abstract: </strong>http://links.lww.com/IJEBH/A249.</p>","PeriodicalId":48473,"journal":{"name":"Jbi Evidence Implementation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evidence-informed decision-making in public health in Canada: a qualitative exploration.\",\"authors\":\"Isabella Romano, Emily C Clark, Janine Quiambao, Miranda Horn, Lynn Dare, Kristin Rogers, Maureen Dobbins\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/XEB.0000000000000454\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Evidence-informed decision-making (EIDM) plays a vital role in public health practice. Canada has invested in support for evidence-informed approaches in public health. Despite growing expectations for EIDM, evidence integration has not been thoroughly evaluated.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study explores EIDM within Canadian public health organizations before the COVID-19 pandemic. A secondary objective is to explore how EIDM in public health was affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using a qualitative descriptive approach, data were collected and analyzed from interviews with public health professionals across Canada.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From interviews with 20 participants in four Canadian provinces and one territory, all participants noted that EIDM was valued, but there was considerable variation in implementation. Participants reported differences in consistency of evidence use, resources available at their public health organizations to support EIDM, and staff knowledge and skills in EIDM. Leadership emerged as a strong influencer of EIDM; however, leadership investment in EIDM varied. Changes in evidence use during the COVID-19 pandemic revealed an urgency for decision-making amidst an influx of evidence and reallocated staff roles.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite gains in the recognized value of EIDM, gaps remain in the integration of evidence into decision-making and adequate resource investment to support EIDM. Time, resources, and skills to adapt processes and implement EIDM are needed for public health organizations in Canada to fully integrate EIDM into all aspects of public health decision-making.</p><p><strong>Spanish abstract: </strong>http://links.lww.com/IJEBH/A249.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48473,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Jbi Evidence Implementation\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Jbi Evidence Implementation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000454\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jbi Evidence Implementation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000454","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:循证决策(EIDM)在公共卫生实践中发挥着至关重要的作用。加拿大已投资支持公共卫生领域的循证方法。尽管人们对 EIDM 的期望越来越高,但尚未对证据整合进行全面评估:本研究探讨了 COVID-19 大流行之前加拿大公共卫生组织内部的 EIDM。次要目的是探讨 COVID-19 大流行对公共卫生领域的 EIDM 有何影响:方法:采用定性描述的方法,从对加拿大各地公共卫生专业人员的访谈中收集和分析数据:在对加拿大四个省和一个地区的 20 名参与者的访谈中,所有参与者都指出,EIDM 得到了重视,但在实施方面存在很大差异。参与者报告了在证据使用的一致性、公共卫生机构支持 EIDM 的可用资源以及员工在 EIDM 方面的知识和技能方面的差异。领导层对 EIDM 的影响很大;但是,领导层对 EIDM 的投入各不相同。在COVID-19大流行期间,证据使用方面的变化表明,在证据大量涌入和工作人员角色重新分配的情况下,决策变得十分紧迫:尽管 EIDM 的价值已得到认可,但在将证据纳入决策和投入足够资源支持 EIDM 方面仍存在差距。加拿大的公共卫生组织需要时间、资源和技能来调整流程和实施 EIDM,以便将 EIDM 全面融入公共卫生决策的各个方面。西班牙文摘要:http://links.lww.com/IJEBH/A249。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evidence-informed decision-making in public health in Canada: a qualitative exploration.

Introduction: Evidence-informed decision-making (EIDM) plays a vital role in public health practice. Canada has invested in support for evidence-informed approaches in public health. Despite growing expectations for EIDM, evidence integration has not been thoroughly evaluated.

Objective: This study explores EIDM within Canadian public health organizations before the COVID-19 pandemic. A secondary objective is to explore how EIDM in public health was affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods: Using a qualitative descriptive approach, data were collected and analyzed from interviews with public health professionals across Canada.

Results: From interviews with 20 participants in four Canadian provinces and one territory, all participants noted that EIDM was valued, but there was considerable variation in implementation. Participants reported differences in consistency of evidence use, resources available at their public health organizations to support EIDM, and staff knowledge and skills in EIDM. Leadership emerged as a strong influencer of EIDM; however, leadership investment in EIDM varied. Changes in evidence use during the COVID-19 pandemic revealed an urgency for decision-making amidst an influx of evidence and reallocated staff roles.

Conclusions: Despite gains in the recognized value of EIDM, gaps remain in the integration of evidence into decision-making and adequate resource investment to support EIDM. Time, resources, and skills to adapt processes and implement EIDM are needed for public health organizations in Canada to fully integrate EIDM into all aspects of public health decision-making.

Spanish abstract: http://links.lww.com/IJEBH/A249.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
13.00%
发文量
23
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信