The Uptake and Utilization of Research Evidence by Child Welfare Decision Makers

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lil Tonmyr
Keyword(s):  
Child Welfare ◽  
Research Evidence ◽  
Decision Makers

scholarly journals The NCCMT’s dynamic model for evidence-informed public health

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
E Clark ◽  
S Neil-Sztramko ◽  
M Dobbins
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Research Evidence ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Local Data ◽  
Public Health Decision ◽  
Health Decision Making ◽  
Political Preferences ◽  
Health Decision ◽  
Structured Approach

Abstract Issue It is well accepted that public health decision makers should use the best available research evidence in their decision-making process. However, research evidence alone is insufficient to inform public health decision making. Description of the problem As new challenges to public health emerge, there can be a paucity of high quality research evidence to inform decisions on new topics. Public health decision makers must combine various sources of evidence with their public health expertise to make evidence-informed decisions. The National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools (NCCMT) has developed a model which combines research evidence with other critical sources of evidence that can help guide decision makers in evidence-informed decision making. Results The NCCMT's model for evidence-informed public health combines findings from research evidence with local data and context, community and political preferences and actions and evidence on available resources. The model has been widely used across Canada and worldwide, and has been integrated into many public health organizations' decision-making processes. The model is also used for teaching an evidence-informed public health approach in Masters of Public Health programs around the globe. The model provides a structured approach to integrating evidence from several critical sources into public health decision making. Use of the model helps ensure that important research, contextual and preference information is sought and incorporated. Lessons Next steps for the model include development of a tool to facilitate synthesis of evidence across all four domains. Although Indigenous knowledges are relevant for public health decision making and should be considered as part of a complete assessment the current model does not capture Indigenous knowledges. Key messages Decision making in public health requires integrating the best available evidence, including research findings, local data and context, community and political preferences and available resources. The NCCMT’s model for evidence-informed public health provides a structured approach to integrating evidence from several critical sources into public health decision making.

Collaborative Practice: A Strategy to Improve the Relevance of Health Services Research

2002 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 18-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Brazil ◽  
Stuart MacLeod ◽  
Brian Guest
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Services Research ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Research Evidence ◽  
Collaborative Practice ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Healthcare Decision ◽  
Services Research ◽  
Collaborative Relationships

Health services research has emerged as a tool for decision makers to make services more effective and efficient. While its value as a basis for decision making is well established, the incorporation of such evidence into decision making remains inconsistent. To this end, strengthening collaborative relationships between researchers and healthcare decision makers has been identified as a significant strategy for putting research evidence into practice.

Decision-makers and the usefulness of research evidence in policy implementation—a case study from Lao PDR

2005 ◽  
Vol 61 (6) ◽  
pp. 1291-1299 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Tomson ◽  
C. Paphassarang ◽  
K. Jönsson ◽  
K. Houamboun ◽  
K. Akkhavong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Policy Implementation ◽  
Research Evidence ◽  
Lao Pdr ◽  
Decision Makers

Frameworks and Models in Decision-Making and Judgment in Child Welfare and Protection

2020 ◽  
pp. 3-26
Author(s):  
Rami Benbenishty ◽  
John D. Fluke
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Information Processing ◽  
Child Welfare ◽  
False Negative ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Theoretical Perspectives ◽  
Specificity And Sensitivity ◽  
Predictive Risk

This chapter presents the basic concepts, theoretical perspectives, and areas of scholarship that bear on decisions in child welfare—making choices in decision environments characterized by high levels of uncertainty. The authors distinguish between normative models that predict what decision-makers ought to choose when faced with alternatives and descriptive models that describe how they tend to make these choices in real life. The chapter reviews those challenges that may be especially relevant in the complex context of child welfare and protection. One way in which decision-makers overcome task complexities and limitations in human information processing (bounded rationality) is by using heuristics to navigate complex tasks. The chapter reviews strategies to correct some limitations in judgment. The authors examine the relationships between workers’ predictions of what would be the outcomes of the case and the actual outcomes and describe two types of error (false positive and false negative) and the related concepts of specificity and sensitivity. These issues are followed by a description of the Lens Model and some of its implications for child welfare decision-making, including predictive risk modeling and studies on information processing models. The final section presents current theoretical models in child welfare decision-making and describes Decision-Making Ecology (DME) and Judgments and Decision Processes in Context (JUDPiC). The chapter concludes with suggestions for future research on child welfare decision-making that could contribute to our conceptual understanding and have practical utility as well.

scholarly journals What influences PhD graduate trajectories during the degree: a research-based policy agenda

2020 ◽  
Vol 80 (6) ◽  
pp. 1011-1043
Author(s):  
Lynn McAlpine ◽  
Montserrat Castello ◽  
Kirsi Pyhaltö
Keyword(s):  
Research Evidence ◽  
Doctoral Programs ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Critical Research ◽  
Research Gaps ◽  
The Past ◽  
Timely Completion ◽  
Systematized Review ◽  
Institutional Contexts ◽  
Doctoral Experience

AbstractDuring the past two decades, PhD graduate numbers have increased dramatically with graduates viewed by governments as a means to advance the knowledge economy and international competitiveness. Concurrently, universities have also invested in policies to monitor satisfaction, retention, and timely completion—and researchers have expanded the study of PhD experience. We, as such researchers, have increasingly received invitations from university decision-makers to present research evidence which might guide their doctoral programs. Their interest provoked us to do a qualitative systematized review of research on doctoral experience—seeking evidence of practices that influenced retention, satisfaction, and completion. The result contributes a synthesis of the critical research evidence that could be used to inform doctoral education policy. We also demonstrate the possibilities of such evidence by suggesting some potential recommendations, while recognizing that there is no direct relationship between research results and their transformation into particular institutional contexts in ways that enhance doctoral experience. We hope our initiative will be taken up and extended by other researchers, particularly the research gaps we note, so we can collectively support the use of research evidence to influence both doctoral policies and practices—with the goal to better prepare PhD researchers for their futures and better support their supervisors.

Programme Approach to Managing Informed Commissioning

2001 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 159-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Miller ◽  
Luke Vale
Keyword(s):  
Research Evidence ◽  
Implementation Strategies ◽  
Organizational Structures ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Small Samples ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Health Board ◽  
Marginal Analysis ◽  
Barriers To Implementation ◽  
Common Barriers

The objective of this paper is to examine possible organizational reasons for why UK NHS commissioners have not adopted programme budgeting and marginal analysis (PBMA). This is despite increasing evidence of discontent with current commissioning and priority-setting processes, increasing research evidence demonstrating the potential of PBMA and support for the principles of PBMA. Two separate semistructured surveys of the views of commissioning decision-makers on the use of PBMA were carried out at Grampian Health Board and Newcastle & North Tyneside Health Authority. Twenty-nine decision-makers were interviewed. Both surveys found common barriers to implementation of PBMA, described by respondents as ‘institutional inertia’. These were the reactive rather than proactive environment; the fear of ‘unnecessary’ explicitness; an aversion to unilateral innovation in the current NHS environment; and the demand for concrete evaluation evidence. It is concluded that these qualitative surveys have small samples and cannot claim to be representative. It may be significant that many issues were common to both surveys carried out separately in organizations. It is unlikely that NHS commissioning will independently adopt techniques such as PBMA, given the current commissioning environment and organizational structures. Implementation strategies and future research on such commissioning innovations may need to focus on institutions as well as the interventions.

scholarly journals Enhancing police integrity by exploring causes of police corruption

2021 ◽  
pp. 1949-1958
Author(s):  
Shakeel Ahmad Khan ◽  
Alia Ahmed ◽  
Kaleem Ahmed
Keyword(s):  
Research Evidence ◽  
Moral Economy ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Police Corruption ◽  
Policy Frameworks ◽  
The Government ◽  
Social Profiles ◽  
Resource Shortage ◽  
Police Integrity

Methods for the elimination of police corruption to enhance integrity, usually disregards its roots that are connected to societal elements in light of the fact that police corruption has societal causes and implementing a change of the police needs, to certain degree, transforming the community. In this research, a qualitative approach (semi-structured interviews, focus group meetings and observations) was used the analysis methods from social profiles categorized as per their degree of police corruption utilizing data. Researchers have described and examined the organizational and social determinants of police corruption to help decision-makers establish social and economic policy frameworks to monitor police corruption. Researchers concluded that poor pay, resource shortage, moral economy, and politicization of police are pertinent to police corruption. In addition, research evidence suggests that the government must increasingly strengthen organizational as well as social measures in order to minimize police corruption.

scholarly journals Improving scientific impact: how to practice science that influences environmental policy and management

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Robert Brewster Fisher ◽  
Stephen Wood ◽  
Mark A. Bradford ◽  
T. Rodd Kelsey
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Environmental Policy ◽  
Research Evidence ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Valuable Resource ◽  
Scientific Impact ◽  
Comprehensive Review ◽  
Environmental Decision Making ◽  
The Impact

Scientists devote substantial time and resources to research intended to help solve environmental problems. Environmental managers and policymakers must decide how to use the best available research evidence to prioritize actions leading to desired environmental outcomes. Yet decision-makers can face barriers to using scientific evidence to inform action. They may be unaware of the evidence, lack access to it, not understand it, or view it as irrelevant. These barriers mean a valuable resource (evidence) is underused. We outline a set of practical steps for scientists who want to improve the impact their research has on decision-making,: (1) Identify and understand the audience; (2) Clarify the need for evidence; (3) Gather "just enough" evidence; and (4) Share and discuss the evidence. These are guidelines, not a strict recipe for success. But we believe that regularly following these recommendations should increase the chance of scientific evidence being considered and used in environmental decision-making. Our goal is for this paper to be accessible to anyone, rather than a comprehensive review of the topic.

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>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document