scholarly journals Social values and health systems in health policy and systems research: a mixed-method systematic review and evidence map

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (6) ◽  
pp. 735-751
Author(s):  
Eleanor Whyle ◽  
Jill Olivier
Keyword(s):  
Health Policy ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Health Systems ◽  
Social Values ◽  
Empirical Work ◽  
Income Country ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Systems Research ◽  
Health Policy And Systems

Abstract Because health systems are conceptualized as social systems, embedded in social contexts and shaped by human agency, values are a key factor in health system change. As such, health systems software—including values, norms, ideas and relationships—is considered a foundational focus of the field of health policy and systems research (HPSR). A substantive evidence-base exploring the influence of software factors on system functioning has developed but remains fragmented, with a lack of conceptual clarity and theoretical coherence. This is especially true for work on ‘social values’ within health systems—for which there is currently no substantive review available. This study reports on a systematic mixed-methods evidence mapping review on social values within HPSR. The study reaffirms the centrality of social values within HPSR and highlights significant evidence gaps. Research on social values in low- and middle-income country contexts is exceedingly rare (and mostly produced by authors in high-income countries), particularly within the limited body of empirical studies on the subject. In addition, few HPS researchers are drawing on available social science methodologies that would enable more in-depth empirical work on social values. This combination (over-representation of high-income country perspectives and little empirical work) suggests that the field of HPSR is at risk of developing theoretical foundations that are not supported by empirical evidence nor broadly generalizable. Strategies for future work on social values in HPSR are suggested, including: countering pervasive ideas about research hierarchies that prize positivist paradigms and systems hardware-focused studies as more rigorous and relevant to policy-makers; utilizing available social science theories and methodologies; conceptual development to build common framings of key concepts to guide future research, founded on quality empirical research from diverse contexts; and using empirical evidence to inform the development of operationalizable frameworks that will support rigorous future research on social values in health systems.

scholarly journals Towards Core Competencies for Health Policy and Systems Research (HPSR) Training: Results From a Global Mapping and Consensus-Building Process

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meike J. Schleiff ◽  
Avanti Rangnekar ◽  
Francisco Oviedo Gomez ◽  
Gina Teddy ◽  
David H. Peters ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Policy ◽  
Health Systems ◽  
Core Competencies ◽  
Continuous Process ◽  
Ethical Reasoning ◽  
Core Competency ◽  
Consensus Building ◽  
Systems Research ◽  
National Training ◽  
Health Policy And Systems

Background: As the field of health policy and systems research (HPSR) continues to grow, there is a recognition of the need for training in HPSR. This aspiration has translated into a multitude of teaching programmes of variable scope and quality, reflecting a lack of consensus on the skills and practices required for rigorous HPSR. The purpose of this paper is to identify an agreed set of core competencies for HPSR researchers, building on the previous work by the Health Systems Global (HSG) Thematic Working Group on Teaching & Learning. Methods: Our methods involved an iterative approach of four phases including a literature review, key informant interviews and group discussions with HPSR educators, and webinars with pre-post surveys capturing views among the global HPSR community. The phased discussions and consensus-building contributed to the evolution of the HPSR competency domains and competencies framework. Results: Emerging domains included understanding health systems complexity, assessing policies and programs, appraising data and evidence, ethical reasoning and practice, leading and mentoring, building partnerships, and translating and utilizing knowledge and HPSR evidence. The development of competencies and their application were often seen as a continuous process spanning evidence generation, partnering, communicating and helping to identify new critical health systems questions. Conclusion: The HPSR competency set can be seen as a useful reference point in the teaching and practice of high-quality HPSR and can be adapted based on national priorities, the particularities of local contexts, and the needs of stakeholders (HPSR researchers and educators), as well as practitioners and policy-makers. Further research is needed in using the core competency set to design national training programmes, develop locally relevant benchmarks and assessment methods, and evaluate their use in different settings.

scholarly journals Local ownership of health policy and systems research in low-income and middle-income countries: a missing element in the uptake debate

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. e001523 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kudakwashe Paul Vanyoro ◽  
Kate Hawkins ◽  
Matthew Greenall ◽  
Helen Parry ◽  
Lynda Keeru
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Policy ◽  
Health Systems ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Country Level ◽  
Systems Research ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Health Policy And Systems

Health policy and systems researchers (HPSRs) in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) aim to influence health systems planning, costing, policy and implementation. Yet, there is still much that we do not know about the types of health systems evidence that are most compelling and impactful to policymakers and community groups, the factors that facilitate the research to decision-making process and the real-world challenges faced when translating research findings into practice in different contexts. Drawing on an analysis of HPSR from LMICs presented at the Fifth Global Symposium on Health Systems Research (HSR 2018), we argue that while there is a recognition in policy studies more broadly about the role of co-production, collective ownership and the value of localised HPSR in the evidence-to-policy discussion, ‘ownership’ of research at country level is a research uptake catalyst that needs to be further emphasised, particularly in the HPSR context. We consider embedded research, participatory or community-initiated research and emergent/responsive research processes, all of which are ‘owned’ by policymakers, healthcare practitioners/managers or community members. We embrace the view that ownership of HPSR by people directly affected by health problems connects research and decision-making in a tangible way, creating pathways to impact.

scholarly journals Building the Field of Health Policy and Systems Research: Social Science Matters

PLoS Medicine ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 8 (8) ◽  
pp. e1001079 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucy Gilson ◽  
Kara Hanson ◽  
Kabir Sheikh ◽  
Irene Akua Agyepong ◽  
Freddie Ssengooba ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Policy ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Systems Research ◽  
Health Policy And Systems

scholarly journals Assessing the field of health policy and systems research using symposium abstract submissions and machine learning techniques

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (10) ◽  
pp. 721-731 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erlyn K Macarayan ◽  
Dina Balabanova ◽  
George Gotsadze
Keyword(s):  
Health Policy ◽  
Health Systems ◽  
Analytical Techniques ◽  
High Income ◽  
Health Systems Research ◽  
Sub Saharan Africa ◽  
Machine Learning Techniques ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Systems Research ◽  
Health Policy And Systems

Abstract The field of health policy and systems research (HPSR) has grown rapidly in the past decade. Examining recently aggregated data from the Global Symposia on Health Systems Research, a key global fora for HPSR convened by the largest international society—Health Systems Global (HSG)—provides opportunities to enhance existing research on HPSR capacity using novel analytical techniques. This addresses the demand not only to map the field but also to examine potential predictors of acceptance to, and participation at, these global conferences to inform future work and strategies in promoting HPSR. We examined data from the abstracts submitted for two Global Symposia on Health Systems Research in 2016 and 2018 by type of institution, countries, regional groupings and gender. After mapping hotspot areas for HPSR production, we then examined how the corresponding author’s characteristics were associated with being accepted to present at the Global Symposia. Our findings showed that submissions for the Global Symposia increased by 12% from 2016 to 2018. Submissions increased across all participant groups, in particular, the for-profit organizations and research/consultancy firms showing the highest increases, at 58% for both. We also found reduced submissions from high-income countries, whereas submissions from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), Sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America, increased substantially revealing the inclusivity values of Symposium organizers. Submissions increased to a larger extent among women than men. Being a woman, coming from a high-income country and having multiple abstracts submitted were found to be significant predictors for an abstract to be accepted and presented in the Symposia. Findings provide critical baseline information on the extent of interest and engagement in a global forum of various institutions and researchers in HPSR that can be useful for setting future directions of HSG and other similar organizations to support the advancement of HPSR worldwide.

Operationalizing the Ethical Review of Global Health Policy and Systems Research: A Proposed Checklist

2021 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 92-122
Author(s):  
Abbas Rattani ◽  
Adnan A. Hyder
Keyword(s):  
Health Policy ◽  
Global Health ◽  
Ethical Review ◽  
Systems Research ◽  
Global Health Policy ◽  
Health Policy And Systems

AbstractThere has been growing consensus to develop relevant guidance to improve the ethical review of global health policy and systems research (HPSR) and address the current absence of formal ethics guidance.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document