Evidence-based policy making in health care: what it is and what it isn't

2005 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 118-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Cookson
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Public Policy ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Policy Outcomes ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Ivory Tower ◽  
Evidence Based Policy

In this paper, I aim to re-establish the meaning and importance of the concept of 'evidence-based policy making' (EBP) in health care. The term EBP is often misunderstood as being either vacuous (who thinks that public policy should not be based on evidence?), unrealistic (the naive product of ivory tower thinking) or conservative (an excuse permanently to delay reform). It need be none of these things. EBP should be thought of as a set of rules and institutional arrangements designed to encourage transparent and balanced use of evidence in public policy making. As well as controlled trials and observational studies, a broad range of theoretical and empirical evidence about human behaviour may be relevant to predicting policy outcomes - including stakeholder opinions and other sources of intelligence that might not qualify as scientific research. Gradual progress towards EBP, properly understood, has the potential to facilitate open democracy and to improve policy outcomes. The argument is illustrated using examples based on large-scale policies of health care reform in England, where progress towards EBP over the last decade has been real but modest.

Toward Evidence-Based Policy Making to Reduce Wasteful Health Care Spending

JAMA ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 322 (15) ◽  
pp. 1460 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen E. Joynt Maddox ◽  
Mark B. McClellan
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Health Care Spending ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Evidence Based Policy

Evidence-based policy making and social science

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerry Stoker ◽  
Mark Evans
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Science And Policy ◽  
Best Friends ◽  
Evidence Based Policy ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Will

This chapter looks at the tensions between the making of public policy and the offering of evidence from social science. Social science and policymaking are not natural ‘best’ friends. Policymakers express frustration that social science often appears to have little of relevance to say and social scientists will regularly complain that policymakers are not interested in using their evidence. Yet the two groups appear, almost against the will of the participants in them, to be thrown together. Policymakers are told to evidence their policies and social scientists are urged to step up to provide that evidence. The aim of this chapter is to help improve that situation by identifying some of the main blockages on either side of the social science and policy making fence and see how they can be addressed.

Organised Chaos: An Interpretive Approach to Evidence-Based Policy Making in Defra

2010 ◽  
Vol 59 (4) ◽  
pp. 959-977 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katy Wilkinson
Keyword(s):  
Policy Making ◽  
Disease Outbreaks ◽  
Policy Outcomes ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Socially Constructed ◽  
Evidence Based Policy ◽  
Scientific Experts ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Modes Of Ordering

The Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) has been heavily criticised for its handling of disease outbreaks in recent years by analysts who compare the conduct of officials with the model of evidence-based policy making, finding fault in their use of advisers or decision-making processes. In this article, I take an alternative approach to policy analysis, based on ethnographic research in the department. I explore the day-to-day interactions between scientific experts and policy makers in Defra to understand why policy making takes the form it does and how scientists negotiate their position within this process. I argue that policy making in Defra is organised by socially constructed narratives that help officials and advisers to make sense of their roles in the policy-making process. Drawing on insights from organisational sociology, I analyse the ways in which Defra officials talk about their responsibilities and understanding of their roles. These narratives act as ‘modes of ordering’ that bring about organisational realities by structuring their relationships, influencing the way they use scientific advice and consequently affecting policy outcomes. I outline three modes of ordering that can be identified in Defra – rationalism, bureaucracy and expediency – and demonstrate that they correspond to three complementary images of evidence-based policy making.

scholarly journals TRADE-OFFS BETWEEN EPISTEMIC AND MORAL VALUES IN EVIDENCE-BASED POLICY

2018 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-78 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donal Khosrowi
Keyword(s):  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Epistemic Values ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Political Values ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
High Quality Evidence ◽  
Evidence Based Policy ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Quality Evidence

Abstract:Proponents of evidence-based policy (EBP) call for public policy to be informed by high-quality evidence from randomized controlled trials. This methodological preference aims to promote several epistemic values, e.g. rigour, unbiasedness, precision, and the ability to obtain causal conclusions. I argue that there is a trade-off between these epistemic values and several non-epistemic, moral and political values. This is because the evidence afforded by standard EBP methods is differentially useful for pursuing different moral and political values. I expand on how this challenges ideals of value-freedom and -neutrality in EBP, and offer suggestions for how EBP methodology might be revised.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document