Towards systematic reviews that inform health care management and policy-making.
Towards systematic reviews that inform health care management and policy-making.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1258/1355819054308549
复制
发表时间：
2005-07-01
影响因子：
2.4
通讯作者：
Ferlie, Ewan
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Lavis, John;Davies, Huw;Ferlie, Ewan
目的：确定提高系统综述对医疗保健管理者和政策制定者有用性的方法，以便随后进行前瞻性评估。
方法：我们系统地回顾了关于医疗保健管理者和政策制定者决策的研究，对加拿大和英国的有针对性的样本（n = 29）进行了访谈，并回顾了研究资助者、研究生产者/提供者以及将其列为目标受众的期刊的网站（n = 45）。
结果：我们的系统综述发现，研究人员与医疗保健政策制定者之间的互动以及时机/及时性等因素似乎增加了政策制定者使用研究的可能性。我们对医疗保健管理者和政策制定者的访谈表明，他们将受益于为他们突出显示与决策相关的信息（例如影响综述在当地适用性的背景因素以及关于干预措施的益处、危害/风险和成本的信息），以及以一种允许快速扫描相关性然后分级进入的方式呈现综述（例如一页要点、三页执行摘要和25页报告）。管理者和政策制定者对建议的有用性看法不一。我们对网站的分析发现，背景因素很少被突出显示，经常提供建议，并且很少使用分级进入格式。
结论：研究人员可以通过让医疗保健管理者和政策制定者参与系统综述的制作，并更好地突出与决策相关的信息，来帮助确保未来的系统综述流能够更好地为医疗保健管理和政策制定提供信息。研究资助者可以通过支持和评估当地的适应过程，例如为潜在相关的系统综述开发并在网上提供更用户友好的“前端”，来帮助确保全球的系统综述储备能够更好地为医疗保健管理和政策制定提供信息。
OBJECTIVES: To identify ways to improve the usefulness of systematic reviews for health care managers and policy-makers that could then be evaluated prospectively.METHODS: We systematically reviewed studies of decision-making by health care managers and policy-makers, conducted interviews with a purposive sample of them in Canada and the United Kingdom (n = 29), and reviewed the websites of research funders, producers/purveyors of research, and journals that include them among their target audiences (n = 45).RESULTS: Our systematic review identified that factors such as interactions between researchers and health care policy-makers and timing/timeliness appear to increase the prospects for research use among policy-makers. Our interviews with health care managers and policy-makers suggest that they would benefit from having information that is relevant for decisions highlighted for them (e.g. contextual factors that affect a review's local applicability and information about the benefits, harms/risks and costs of interventions) and having reviews presented in a way that allows for rapid scanning for relevance and then graded entry (such as one page of take-home messages, a three-page executive summary and a 25-page report). Managers and policy-makers have mixed views about the helpfulness of recommendations. Our analysis of websites found that contextual factors were rarely highlighted, recommendations were often provided and graded entry formats were rarely used.CONCLUSIONS: Researchers could help to ensure that the future flow of systematic reviews will better inform health care management and policy-making by involving health care managers and policy-makers in their production and better highlighting information that is relevant for decisions. Research funders could help to ensure that the global stock of systematic reviews will better inform health care management and policy-making by supporting and evaluating local adaptation processes such as developing and making available online more user-friendly 'front ends' for potentially relevant systematic reviews.