scholarly journals Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak: can HTA improve preparedness and response in emergencies with a high degree of uncertainty?

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
A Timen ◽  
A Miglietta
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Public Health Decision ◽  
Public Health Emergencies ◽  
Health Decision Making ◽  
Health Decision ◽  
High Degree ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Evidence-based decision-making is central to public health. Implementing evidence-informed actions is most challenging during a public health emergency as in an epidemic, when time is limited, scientific uncertainties and political pressures tend to be high, and irrefutable evidence may be lacking. The Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak is determining a scenario of uncertainty for public health decision-making with fragmented and different responses also within countries (i.e. regional level), which are implemented quickly, sometimes not fully supported by the necessary body of scientific evidence. In such a situation, following a common line and having a shared tool that would allow to include evidence in public health decision-making, would be strategic to strengthen the impact of interventions, enabling stakeholders and decision makers taking actions based on the best available evidence through a process which is systematic and transparent. The objective of this presentation is to use the example of the COVID-19 outbreak, in order to explore how HTA can improve preparedness and response in emergencies with a high degree of uncertainty, representing the mechanisms through which interdisciplinary evidence feeds into decision-making processes during public health emergencies, addressing the link between scientific evidence and decision-making in public health emergencies, overcoming the key challenges faced by public health experts when advising decision makers, including strengthening and accelerating knowledge transfer through rapid HTA, improving networking between actors and disciplines.

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.

scholarly journals Health economics methods for public health resource allocation: a qualitative interview study of decision makers from an English local authority

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 128-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma Frew ◽  
Katie Breheny
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Economics ◽  
Local Authority ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Natural Experiments ◽  
Public Health Decision ◽  
Health Decision Making ◽  
Qualitative Interview Study ◽  
Health Decision

AbstractLocal authorities in England have responsibility for public health, however, in recent years, budgets have been drastically reduced placing decision makers under unprecedented financial pressure. Although health economics can offer support for decision making, there is limited evidence of it being used in practice. The aim of this study was to undertake in-depth qualitative research within one local authority to better understand the context for public health decision making; what, and how economics evidence is being used; and invite suggestions for how methods could be improved to better support local public health decision making. The study included both observational methods and in-depth interviews. Key meetings were observed and semi-structured interviews conducted with participants who had a decision-making role to explore views on economics, to understand the barriers to using evidence and to invite suggestions for improvements to methods. Despite all informants valuing the use of health economics, many barriers were cited: including a perception of a narrow focus on the health sector; lack of consideration of population impact; and problems with translating long timescales to short term impact. Methodological suggestions included the broadening of frameworks; increased use of natural experiments; and capturing wider non-health outcomes that resonate with the priorities of multiple stakeholders.

scholarly journals 5.I. Skills building seminar: National burden of disease studies: inspirational experiences from across the globe

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Risk Factors ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Burden Of Disease ◽  
Public Health Decision ◽  
Health Decision Making ◽  
National Burden ◽  
Health Decision ◽  
Disease Study ◽  
The Impact

Abstract What are the most relevant diseases in a country? Which risk factors are the strongest contributors to disease and death? How is the impact of different diseases evolving over time, and how does it compare to other countries or across sub-national units? With a constantly growing need to rationalize the allocation of available resources, a timely, sound and comprehensive answer to these fundamental questions is more than ever needed to inform public health decision making. Driven by the impact of the Global Burden of Disease study, several countries have decided to establish a national burden of disease study to address these questions. Central to any national burden of disease study is the establishment of a coherent framework for routinely quantifying the impact of diseases and risk factors in terms of Disability-Adjusted Life Years (DALYs). National burden of disease studies further allow to valorise existing health information, foster collaborations with national stakeholders, and support capacity building. Implementing a national burden of disease study is however highly resource demanding, and many researchers struggle to effectively translate their findings to decision makers. This skills building seminar gathers five inspirational examples of national burden of disease studies from across the globe. They reflect the diversity in approaches that currently exist. Indeed, while some countries have implemented their national burden of disease framework themselves, an increasing number of countries is collaborating with the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) to conduct national and sub-national burden of disease studies. Both approaches have their own specific advantages, which will be outlined during the seminar. The selected examples further document the iterative, step-wise processes behind the implementation of a national burden of disease study, as well as the challenges, but also success stories, in translating data to policies. Overall, the aim is to demonstrate the added value of national burden of disease studies, and to share realistic, hands-on experiences on the steps needed to initiate, implement and maintain a national burden of disease study. Key messages National burden of disease studies are increasingly established across the world to support public health decision making. Different international initiatives are emerging to support countries initiate, implement and maintain a national burden of disease study.

scholarly journals Contributions in the field of Public Health for decision-making in health

2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 128 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luiz Antônio Tavares Neves
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Motor Development ◽  
Growth And Development ◽  
Human Growth ◽  
Public Health Decision ◽  
Health Decision Making ◽  
Scientific World ◽  
Health Decision ◽  
Human Growth And Development

  Brazil has made a wide development and contribution in the field of Public Health. These contributions have maximized public health decision-making, which is a factor of great importance for the maintenance of health of a given population, either in the prevention of disease, as is the case of immunizations or with actions in Health Promotion, improving the quality of life of the affected population. Thus, the Journal of Human Growth and Development has contributed enormously to the dissemination of knowledge, not only in Brazil but also in the world making a major effort with its publications in English which is the preferred language of the modern scientific world. It was evidenced the importance of research in the investigation of better ways to obtain the public health of a given community, bringing discussion of themes that involve aspects of human growth and development such as nutritional aspects, sexuality, motor development, covering situations and diseases as obesity, cerebral palsy, dyslexia and violence. The Journal of Human Growth and Development has maintained the tradition of approaching the different aspects that involve clinical practice for people and for Public Health. 

Public Health Decision Making and Risk Perception

2010 ◽  
pp. 729-750 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julie S. Downs ◽  
Wändi Bruine de Bruin ◽  
Baruch Fischhoff ◽  
Elizabeth A. Walker
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Risk Perception ◽  
Public Health Decision ◽  
Health Decision Making ◽  
Health Decision
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document