scholarly journals Evidence-informed decision making for nutrition: African experiences and way forward

2017 ◽  
Vol 76 (4) ◽  
pp. 589-596 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richmond Aryeetey ◽  
Michelle Holdsworth ◽  
Christine Taljaard ◽  
Waliou Amoussa Hounkpatin ◽  
Esi Colecraft ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Informed Decision ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Informed Decision Making ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Country Level ◽  
Stakeholder Influence ◽  
Nutrition Research

Although substantial amount of nutrition research is conducted in Africa, the research agenda is mainly donor-driven. There is a clear need for a revised research agenda in Africa which is both driven by and responding to local priorities. The present paper summarises proceedings of a symposium on how evidence can guide decision makers towards context-appropriate priorities and decisions in nutrition. The paper focuses on lessons learnt from case studies by the Evidence Informed Decision Making in Nutrition and Health Network implemented between 2015 and 2016 in Benin, Ghana and South Africa. Activities within these countries were organised around problem-oriented evidence-informed decision-making (EIDM), capacity strengthening and leadership and horizontal collaboration. Using a combination of desk-reviews, stakeholder influence-mapping, semi-structured interviews and convening platforms, these country-level studies demonstrated strong interest for partnership between researchers and decision makers, and use of research evidence for prioritisation and decision making in nutrition. Identified capacity gaps were addressed through training workshops on EIDM, systematic reviews, cost–benefit evaluations and evidence contextualisation. Investing in knowledge partnerships and development of capacity and leadership are key to drive appropriate use of evidence in nutrition policy and programming in Africa.

scholarly journals Research use at the Ministry of Health in Burkina Faso: the decision-makers’ perspective

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Dagenais
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Knowledge Transfer ◽  
Burkina Faso ◽  
Informed Decision ◽  
Communication Strategy ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Research Use ◽  
Informed Decision Making ◽  
Ministry Of Health ◽  
Policy Makers

Abstract Background Despite the increased emphasis placed on the use of evidence for policy development, relatively few initiatives have been developed to support evidence-informed decision-making, especially in West Africa. Moreover, studies examining the conditions under which policy-makers use research-based evidence are still scarce, but they show that their attitudes and opinions about research are one of the main determinants of such use. In February 2017, Burkina Faso’s Minister of Health planned to create a unit to promote evidence-informed decision-making within the ministry. Before the unit was set up, documenting the attitudes towards research at the highest levels of his Ministry appeared profitable to the unit’s planning. Method Individual interviews were conducted by the author with 14 actors positioned to consider evidence during decision-making from the Burkina Faso’s Minister of health cabinet. An interview grid was used to explore several themes such as attitudes towards research, obstacles and facilitators to research use, example of research use in decision-making and finally, ways to increase decision-makers’ participation in knowledge transfer activities. Interviews were partially transcribed and analysed by the author. Results The results show a mixed attitude towards research and relatively little indication of research use reported by respondents. Important obstacles were identified: evidence inaccessibility, lack of implementation guidelines, absence of clear communication strategy and studies’ lack of relevance for decision-making. Many suggestions were proposed such as raising awareness, improving access and research communication and prioritizing interactions with researchers. Respondents agree with the low participation of decision-makers in knowledge transfer activities: more leadership from the senior officials was suggested and greater awareness of the importance of their presence. Conclusions The conclusion presents avenues for reflection and action to increase the potential impact of the knowledge transfer unit planned within the Ministry of Health of Burkina Faso. This innovative initiative will be impactful if the obstacles identified in this study and policy-makers’ preferences and needs are taken into account during its development and implementation.

Essential skills for using research evidence in public health policy: a systematic review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saliha Ziam ◽  
Pierre Gignac ◽  
Élodie Courant ◽  
Esther Mc Sween-Cadieux
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Research Evidence ◽  
Informed Decision ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Informed Decision Making ◽  
Evidence Use ◽  
Public Health Decision ◽  
Health Decision

Background: Decisions related to the development and implementation of public health programmes or policies can benefit from more effective use of the best available knowledge. However, decision makers do not always feel sufficiently equipped or may lack the capacity to use evidence. This can lead them to overlook or set aside research results that could be relevant to their practice area.Aims and objectives: The objective of this systematic review was to synthesise the essential skills that facilitate the use of research evidence by public health decision makers.Methods: Thirty-nine articles that met our inclusion criteria were included. An inductive approach was used to extract data on evidence-informed decision-making-related skills and data were synthesised as a narrative review.Findings: The analysis revealed three categories of skills that are essential for evidence-informed decision-making process: interpersonal, cognitive, and leadership and influencing skills. Such cross-sectoral skills are essential for identifying, obtaining, synthesising, and integrating sound research results into the decision-making process.Discussion and conclusions: The results of this systematic review will help direct capacity-building efforts towards enhancing research evidence use by public health decision makers, such as developing different types of training that would be relevant to their needs. Also, when considering the evidence-informed decision-making skills development, there are several useful and complementary approaches to link research most effectively to action. On one hand, it is important not only to support decision makers at the individual level through skills development, but also to provide them with a day-to-day environment that is conducive to evidence use.<br />Key messages<br /><ul><li>Public health programmes or policies can benefit from more effective use of the best available knowledge;</li><br /><li>This review identified 39 studies on skills related to evidence-informed decision making;</li><br /><li>Three categories of skills are proposed: cognitive, interpersonal and leadership and influencing skills;</li><br /><li>It will help direct capacity-building efforts towards enhancing evidence use by decision makers.</li></ul>

scholarly journals More harm than good? Building a framework to identify adverse effects of public health interventions

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
J Stratil ◽  
K Oliver ◽  
P von Philipsborn ◽  
A Movsisyan ◽  
E A Rehfuess
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Informed Decision ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Informed Decision Making ◽  
Public Health Interventions ◽  
Integrate Framework

Abstract Background While the importance of adverse events of medical interventions is widely recognized, adverse effects of public health interventions remain a neglected topic. This project aims to develop a framework to guide researchers and decision-makers to systematically reflect on and identify potential adverse effects of public health interventions. Methods We conducted a mixed-method systematic review of theoretical and conceptual publications on adverse events of public health interventions to develop a preliminary framework employing best-fit framework synthesis. We used the WHO-INTEGRATE framework as a starting point for the synthesis, a multidimensional evidence-to-decision framework developed for complex interventions in complex systems. Results The framework includes two interlinked parts: The first maps domains in which potential adverse events might arise. Drawing on the WHO-INTEGRATE framework, these domains include aspects related to health, but also domains related to societal, economic, and environmental implications. The second part maps general mechanisms through which public health interventions can lead to adverse effects (e.g. reactive behaviour change, increase of labelling and stigmatization, and exposure to environmental risk-factors). Conclusions The framework will be advanced in the second phase of the project through empirical studies of harmful effects in public health interventions, which we will identify through an overview of systematic reviews. Adverse effects of public health interventions are currently not sufficiently considered in research and practice. Taking them into account is essential for informed decision-making and establishing appropriate countermeasures. Our framework could be a valuable asset for researchers and policy makers in developing, implementing and evaluating public health interventions. Key messages Awareness of the adverse effects of public health interventions is essential for informed decision-making and establishing countermeasures. This framework supports researchers and decision-makers in systematically reflecting on and identifying adverse events when developing, piloting, implementing or evaluating public health interventions.

scholarly journals The National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools (NCCMT): Supporting evidence-informed decision-making in public health in Canada

2021 ◽  
Vol 47 (56) ◽  
pp. 292-296
Author(s):  
Heather Husson ◽  
Claire Howarth ◽  
Sarah Neil-Sztramko ◽  
Maureen Dobbins
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Informed Decision ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Supporting Evidence ◽  
Informed Decision Making ◽  
Public Health Response ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Health Infrastructure ◽  
Health Response

The National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools (NCCMT) is part of a network of six National Collaborating Centres for Public Health (NCC) created in 2005 by the federal government following the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) epidemic to strengthen public health infrastructure in Canada. The work of the NCCMT, to support evidence-informed decision-making (EIDM) in public health in Canada, is accomplished by curating trustworthy evidence, building competence to use evidence and accelerating change in EIDM. Ongoing engagement with its target audiences ensures NCCMT’s relevance and ability to respond to evolving public health needs. This has been particularly critical during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, which saw NCCMT pivot its activities to support the public health response by conducting rapid reviews on priority questions identified by decision-makers from federal to local levels as well as create and maintain a national repository of in-progress or completed syntheses. These efforts, along with partnering with the COVID-19 Evidence Network to support Decision-Making (COVID-END), sought to reduce duplication, increase coordination of synthesis efforts and support decision-makers to use the best available evidence in decision-making. Data from website statistics illustrate the successful uptake of these initiatives across Canada and internationally.

Facilitators and Barriers to Implementing a Digital Informed Decision Making Tool in Primary Care: A Qualitative Study

2022 ◽  
Vol 13 (01) ◽  
pp. 001-009
Author(s):  
Nicole Puccinelli-Ortega ◽  
Mark Cromo ◽  
Kristie L. Foley ◽  
Mark B. Dignan ◽  
Ajay Dharod ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Decision Aids ◽  
Informed Decision ◽  
Care Practice ◽  
Informed Decision Making ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Clinic Staff ◽  
Facilitators And Barriers

Abstract Background Informed decision aids provide information in the context of the patient's values and improve informed decision making (IDM). To overcome barriers that interfere with IDM, our team developed an innovative iPad-based application (aka “app”) to help patients make informed decisions about colorectal cancer screening. The app assesses patients' eligibility for screening, educates them about their options, and empowers them to request a test via the interactive decision aid. Objective The aim of the study is to explore how informed decision aids can be implemented successfully in primary care clinics, including the facilitators and barriers to implementation; strategies for minimizing barriers; adequacy of draft training materials; and any additional support or training desired by clinics. Design This work deals with a multicenter qualitative study in rural and urban settings. Participants A total of 48 individuals participated including primary care practice managers, clinicians, nurses, and front desk staff. Approach Focus groups and semi-structured interviews, with data analysis were guided by thematic analysis. Key Results Salient emergent themes were time, workflow, patient age, literacy, and electronic health record (EHR) integration. Saving time was important to most participants. Patient flow was a concern for all clinic staff, and they expressed that any slowdown due to patients using the iPad module or perceived additional work to clinic staff would make staff less motivated to use the program. Participants voiced concern about older patients being unwilling or unable to utilize the iPad and patients with low literacy ability being able to read or comprehend the information. Conclusion Integrating new IDM apps into the current clinic workflow with minimal disruptions would increase the probability of long-term adoption and ultimate sustainability. NIH trial registry number R01CA218416-A1.

scholarly journals Going Beyond Panaceas: The Diversity of Land Observatory Forms in Africa

Land ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Quentin Grislain ◽  
Jeremy Bourgoin ◽  
Ward Anseeuw ◽  
Perrine Burnod ◽  
Eva Hershaw ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Participant Observation ◽  
Video Conferencing ◽  
Analytical Framework ◽  
Informed Decision ◽  
Informed Decision Making ◽  
Information Production ◽  
Dynamic Data ◽  
Ex Post ◽  
Ex Ante

In recent decades, mechanisms for observation and information production have proliferated in an attempt to meet the growing needs of stakeholders to access dynamic data for the purposes of informed decision-making. In the land sector, a growing number of land observatories are producing data and ensuring its transparency. We hypothesize that these structures are being developed in response to the need for information and knowledge, a need that is being driven by the scale and diversity of land issues. Based on the results of a study conducted on land observatories in Africa, this paper presents existing and past land observatories on the continent and proposes to assess their diversity through an analysis of core dimensions identified in the literature. The analytical framework was implemented through i) an analysis of existing literature on land observatories, ii) detailed assessments of land observatories based on semi-open interviews conducted via video conferencing, iii) fieldwork and visits to several observatories, and iv) participant observation through direct engagement and work at land observatories. We emphasize that the analytical framework presented here can be used as a tool by land observatories to undertake ex-post self-evaluations that take the observatory’s trajectory into account, or in the case of proposed new land observatories, to undertake ex-ante analyses and design the pathway towards the intended observatory.

scholarly journals A referral aid for smoking cessation interventions in primary care: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniëlle N. Zijlstra ◽  
Jean W.M. Muris ◽  
Catherine Bolman ◽  
J. Mathis Elling ◽  
Vera E.R.A. Knapen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Smoking Cessation ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Structural Equation ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Linear Regression Analysis ◽  
Informed Decision ◽  
Equation Modeling ◽  
Informed Decision Making

Abstract Background: To expedite the use of evidence-based smoking cessation interventions (EBSCIs) in primary care and to thereby increase the number of successful quit attempts, a referral aid was developed. This aid aims to optimize the referral to and use of EBSCIs in primary care and to increase adherence to Dutch guidelines for smoking cessation. Methods: Practice nurses (PNs) will be randomly allocated to an experimental condition or control condition, and will then recruit smoking patients who show a willingness to quit smoking within six months. PNs allocated to the experimental condition will provide smoking cessation guidance in accordance with the referral aid. Patients from both conditions will receive questionnaires at baseline and after six months. Cessation effectiveness will be tested via multilevel logistic regression analyses. Multiple imputations as well as intention to treat analysis will be performed. Intervention appreciation and level of informed decision-making will be compared using analysis of (co)variance. Predictors for appreciation and informed decision-making will be assessed using multiple linear regression analysis and/or structural equation modeling. Finally, a cost-effectiveness study will be conducted. Discussion: This paper describes the study design for the development and evaluation of an information and decision tool to support PNs in their guidance of smoking patients and their referral to EBSCIs. The study aims to provide insight into the (cost) effectiveness of an intervention aimed at expediting the use of EBSCIs in primary care.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document