Reporting of context and implementation in studies of global health interventions: a pilot study.
Reporting of context and implementation in studies of global health interventions: a pilot study.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/1748-5908-9-57
复制
发表时间：
2014-05-12
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Perry T
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Luoto J;Shekelle PG;Maglione MA;Johnsen B;Perry T
在全球卫生政策圈中，越来越多的人推动“循证”决策。然而，目前对于如何评估全球健康证据还没有商定的标准或指南。最近对现有证据框架的评估表明，方案背景和项目实施的细节是为政策提供信息所需的缺失组成部分。我们进行了一项试点研究，以评估报告的背景和全球卫生干预措施的研究实施的现状。我们确定了三套现有的执行情况报告标准，并从中选出了10项可能与决策者在全球卫生方面的需求相关的标准。我们将这10项标准应用于三种全球卫生干预措施的证据库中的15篇文章，这些干预措施代表了一系列倡导的全球卫生项目或干预措施：家庭水氯化，预防母婴传播艾滋病毒，以及非专业社区卫生工作者降低儿童死亡率。我们使用了良好-一般-差/无的评分标准。报告较差/无报告的标准比例范围为11%至54%，平均为30%。8篇文章的“良好”或“公平”的文件大于75%的标准，而5篇文章的“差或没有”的文件为50%或更多的标准。查明了良好报告的实例。全球卫生干预措施研究报告的背景和执行情况大多一般或较差，而且差异很大。报告中的特殊变异性表明，全球卫生调查人员需要更多的指导，以了解应衡量的背景和执行情况的哪些方面以及如何报告这些方面。缺乏背景和实施信息是全球卫生政策制定者做出决策所需证据的一个主要差距。
There is an increasing push for ‘evidence-based’ decision making in global health policy circles. However, at present there are no agreed upon standards or guidelines for how to evaluate evidence in global health. Recent evaluations of existing evidence frameworks that could serve such a purpose have identified details of program context and project implementation as missing components needed to inform policy. We performed a pilot study to assess the current state of reporting of context and implementation in studies of global health interventions. We identified three existing criteria sets for implementation reporting and selected from them 10 criteria potentially relevant to the needs of policy makers in global health contexts. We applied these 10 criteria to 15 articles included in the evidence base for three global health interventions chosen to represent a diverse set of advocated global health programs or interventions: household water chlorination, prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV, and lay community health workers to reduce child mortality. We used a good-fair-poor/none scale for the ratings. The proportion of criteria for which reporting was poor/none ranged from 11% to 54% with an average of 30%. Eight articles had ‘good’ or ‘fair’ documentation for greater than 75% of criteria, while five articles had ‘poor or none’ documentation for 50% of criteria or more. Examples of good reporting were identified. Reporting of context and implementation information in studies of global health interventions is mostly fair or poor, and highly variable. The idiosyncratic variability in reporting indicates that global health investigators need more guidance about what aspects of context and implementation to measure and how to report them. This lack of context and implementation information is a major gap in the evidence needed by global health policy makers to reach decisions.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
2.8
作者：
Torpey K;Kabaso M;Kasonde P;Dirks R;Bweupe M;Thompson C;Mukadi YD
通讯作者：
Mukadi YD
DOI：
10.1186/1748-5908-4-50
发表时间：
2009-08-07
期刊：
Implementation science : IS
影响因子：
--
作者：
Damschroder LJ;Aron DC;Keith RE;Kirsh SR;Alexander JA;Lowery JC
通讯作者：
Lowery JC
影响因子：
56.9
作者：
Murray, CJL;Lopez, AD
通讯作者：
Lopez, AD
影响因子：
168.9
作者：
Manandhar, DS;Osrin, D;Costello, AMD
通讯作者：
Costello, AMD
DOI：
10.4269/ajtmh.2005.73.926
发表时间：
2005-11-01
影响因子：
3.3
作者：
Lule, JR;Mermin, J;Quick, R
通讯作者：
Quick, R