scholarly journals The Politics of Evidence Use in Health Policy Making in Germany: The Case of Regulating Hospital Minimum Volumes

Author(s):  
Stefanie Ettelt
Health Policy ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 121 (3) ◽  
pp. 273-281 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ien van de Goor ◽  
Riitta-Maija Hämäläinen ◽  
Ahmed Syed ◽  
Cathrine Juel Lau ◽  
Petru Sandu ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Ben Verboom ◽  
Aron Baumann

Background: The use of research evidence in health policy-making is a popular line of inquiry for scholars of public health and policy studies, with qualitative methods constituting the dominant strategy in this area. Research on this subject has been criticized for, among other things, disproportionately focusing on high-income countries; overemphasizing ‘barriers and facilitators’ related to evidence use to the neglect of other, less descriptive concerns; relying on descriptive, rather than in-depth explanatory designs; and failing to draw on insights from political/policy studies theories and concepts. We aimed to comprehensively map the global, peer-reviewed qualitative literature on the use of research evidence in health policy-making and to provide a descriptive overview of the geographic, temporal, methodological, and theoretical characteristics of this body of literature. Methods: We conducted a systematic review following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. We searched nine electronic databases, hand-searched 11 health- and policy-related journals, and systematically scanned the reference lists of included studies and previous reviews. No language, date or geographic limitations were imposed. Results: The review identified 319 qualitative studies on a diverse array of topics related to the use of evidence in health policy-making, spanning 72 countries and published over a nearly 40 year period. A majority of these studies were conducted in high-income countries, but a growing proportion of the research output in this area is now coming from low- and middle-income countries, especially from sub-Saharan Africa. While over half of all studies did not use an identifiable theory or framework, and only one fifth of studies used a theory or conceptual framework drawn from policy studies or political science, we found some evidence that theory-driven and explanatory (eg, comparative case study) designs are becoming more common in this literature. Investigations of the barriers and facilitators related to evidence use constitute a large proportion but by no means a majority of the work in this area. Conclusion: This review provides a bird’s eye mapping of the peer reviewed qualitative research on evidence-to-policy processes, and has identified key features of – and gaps within – this body of literature that will hopefully inform, and improve, research in this area moving forward.


Author(s):  
Justeen K. Hyde ◽  
Thomas I. Mackie ◽  
Lawrence A. Palinkas ◽  
Emily Niemi ◽  
Laurel K. Leslie

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 1043-1055
Author(s):  
Gaby Umbach

This article1 offers reflections on the use of data as evidence in 21st century policy-making. It discusses the concept of evidence-informed policy-making (EIPM) as well as the governance and knowledge effects of data as evidence. With this focus, it interlinks the analysis of statistics and politics. The paper first introduces the concept of EIPM and the impact of evidence use. Here it focusses on science and knowledge as resources in policy-making, on the institutionalisation of science advice and on the translation of information and knowledge into evidence. The second part of the article reflects on data as evidence. This part concentrates on abstract and concrete functions of data as governance tools in policy-making, on data as a robust form of evidence and on the effects of data on knowledge and governance. The third part highlights challenges for data as evidence in policy-making, among them, politicisation, transparency, and diversity as well as objectivity and contestation. Finally, the last part draws conclusions on the production and use of data as evidence in EIPM. Throughout the second part of the reflections, reference is made to Walter Radermacher’s 2019 matrix of actors and activities related to data, facts, and policy published in this journal.


2004 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 225-237 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gunnar Kaati ◽  
Michael Sjöström ◽  
Monika Vester

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document