How Narrative Focus and a Statistical Map Shape Health Policy Support Among State Legislators

Abstract Background The institutionalization of evidence-informed health policy-making (EIHP) is complex and complicated. It is complex because it has many players and is complicated because its institutionalization will require many changes that will be challenging to make. Like many other issues, strengthening EIHP needs a road map, which should consider challenges and address them through effective, harmonized and contextualized strategies. This study aims to develop a road map for enhancing EIHP in Iran based on steps of planning. Methods This study consisted of three phases: (1) identifying barriers to EIHP, (2) recognizing interventions and (3) measuring the use of evidence in Iran's health policy-making. A set of activities was established for conducting these, including foresight, systematic review and policy dialogue, to identify the current and potential barriers for the first phase. For the second phase, an evidence synthesis was performed through a scoping review, by searching the websites of benchmark institutions which had good examples of EIHP practices in order to extract and identify interventions, and through eight policy dialogues and two broad opinion polls to contextualize the list of interventions. Simultaneously, two qualitative-quantitative studies were conducted to design and use a tool for assessing EIHP in the third phase. Results We identified 97 barriers to EIHP and categorized them into three groups, including 35 barriers on the “generation of evidence” (push side), 41 on the “use of evidence” (pull side) and 21 on the “interaction between these two” (exchange side). The list of 41 interventions identified through evidence synthesis and eight policy dialogues was reduced to 32 interventions after two expert opinion polling rounds. These interventions were classified into four main strategies for strengthening (1) the education and training system (6 interventions), (2) the incentives programmes (7 interventions), (3) the structure of policy support organizations (4 interventions) and (4) the enabling processes to support EIHP (15 interventions). Conclusion The policy options developed in the study provide a comprehensive framework to chart a path for strengthening the country’s EIHP considering both global practices and the context of Iran. It is recommended that operational plans be prepared for road map interventions, and the necessary resources provided for their implementation. The implementation of the road map will require attention to the principles of good governance, with a focus on transparency and accountability.

Download Full-text

5.O. Workshop: The Role Of The Joint Research Centre In Supporting and Harmonizing Cancer Data CollectionOrganised by: Public Health Policy Support Unit, IHCP, JRC-Ispra

European Journal of Public Health ◽

10.1093/eurpub/ckw168.067 ◽

2016 ◽

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

Health Policy ◽

Public Health Policy ◽

Policy Support ◽

Research Centre ◽

Joint Research ◽

Joint Research Centre ◽

Support Unit ◽

Cancer Data

Download Full-text

Health policy support under extreme uncertainty: the case of cervical cancer in Cambodia

EURO Journal on Decision Processes ◽

10.1007/s40070-015-0053-1 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 4 (3-4) ◽

pp. 183-218 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Steffen Flessa ◽

Dominik Dietz ◽

Elisabete Weiderpass

Keyword(s):

Cervical Cancer ◽

Health Policy ◽

Policy Support

Download Full-text

Comparative Analysis of State Level Health Policy Support for Opioid Abuse Mitigation in Rural America

10.37808/jhhsa.44.2.3 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 137-161

Author(s):

Carrie Shaver ◽

James Johnson ◽

Richard Greenhill ◽

Sudha Nadimidla

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

Health Policy ◽

Comparative Analysis ◽

Best Practice ◽

Financial Burden ◽

State Level ◽

Opioid Use Disorder ◽

Policy Support ◽

Rural America ◽

Opioid Use

In rural America, opioid use disorder (OUD) continues to adversely impacted familial, public, and economic systems, creating extraordinary societal and financial burden. This comparative analysis of state-level public health policy and practices in rural opioid use abatement promotes the development and implementation of contextualized evidence-based comprehensive policy initiatives. Policy analysis across select highly affected states (Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, and West Virginia) and exemplar OUD policy response states (Colorado, Massachusetts, Ohio, and Vermont) was performed using a systematic review of literature, legislation, plans, and policies. Findings included close alignment between states’ OUD policies and public health best practice standards; minimized differences between exemplar and highly affected states policy responses; and resource driven gaps in opioid epidemic legislation, regulation, guidelines, strategic plans, and initiatives. Furthermore, it is advocated that public and private stakeholders committed to health equity must seek reductions in opioid related disease and mortality through increased resource allocation.

Download Full-text