Capturing lessons learned from evidence-to-policy initiatives through structured reflection
Capturing lessons learned from evidence-to-policy initiatives through structured reflection
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/1478-4505-12-2
复制
发表时间：
2014-01-17
影响因子：
4
通讯作者：
Ataya, Nour
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
El-Jardali, Fadi;Lavis, John;Ataya, Nour
工作背景：知识转化平台（KTP）是决策者、利益相关者和研究人员之间的伙伴关系，正在低收入和中等收入国家（LMIC）建立，以加强循证卫生决策（EIHP）。本研究旨在更好地了解：（一）KTP开展的活动;（二）KTP领导者、政策制定者和利益相关者如何看待这些活动及其产出;（三）支持KTP工作和挑战的促进者，以及克服这些挑战的经验教训;（四）有助于确保KTP可持续性的因素。方法：本文对来自以下方面的定性数据进行了三角分析：i）对47名关键信息提供者进行了17次半结构化访谈，其中包括来自10个关键信息提供者的关键信息提供者领导人、政策制定者和利益相关者; ii）文件审查; iii）观察2012年8月在阿迪斯举行的低收入国家环境影响评价国际论坛的审议情况。目的抽样和数据进行了分析，使用主题analysis.Results：审议对话告知的证据简报被确定为最值得称赞的工具，受访者为加强EIHP。关键技术方案报告说，它们有助于提高人们对环境影响国际水文计划重要性的认识，并加强了决策者、利益攸关方和研究人员之间的关系。政策制定者和国际资助者的支持促进了关键技术方案的活动，而缺乏开展强化国际水文计划活动的熟练人力资源则阻碍了关键技术方案的开展。在供资结束后确保加强国际水文计划倡议的可持续性是关键技术点面临的一项重大挑战。KTPs报告说，政府内的制度化有助于留住人力资源和确保资金，而大学主办的KTPs强调了自治的优势，从政治利益。结论：KTPs的建立是一个很有前途的发展，支持EIHP。从关键技术点的经验中实时吸取教训，可以在短期内支持改进关键技术点的运作，同时为长期维持其工作提供理由。吸取的经验教训可以帮助在其他国家推广类似的EIHP倡议。
Background: Knowledge translation platforms (KTPs), which are partnerships between policymakers, stakeholders, and researchers, are being established in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs) to enhance evidence-informed health policymaking (EIHP). This study aims to gain a better understanding of the i) activities conducted by KTPs, ii) the way in which KTP leaders, policymakers, and stakeholders perceive these activities and their outputs, iii) facilitators that support KTP work and challenges, and the lessons learned for overcoming such challenges, and iv) factors that can help to ensure the sustainability of KTPs.Methods: This paper triangulated qualitative data from: i) 17 semi-structured interviews with 47 key informants including KTP leaders, policymakers, and stakeholders from 10 KTPs; ii) document reviews, and iii) observation of deliberations at the International Forum on EIHP in LMICs held in Addis Ababa in August 2012. Purposive sampling was used and data were analyzed using thematic analysis.Results: Deliberative dialogues informed by evidence briefs were identified as the most commendable tools by interviewees for enhancing EIHP. KTPs reported that they have contributed to increased awareness of the importance of EIHP and strengthened relationships among policymakers, stakeholders, and researchers. Support from policymakers and international funders facilitated KTP activities, while the lack of skilled human resources to conduct EIHP activities impeded KTPs. Ensuring the sustainability of EIHP initiatives after the end of funding was a major challenge for KTPs. KTPs reported that institutionalization within the government has helped to retain human resources and secure funding, whereas KTPs hosted by universities highlighted the advantage of autonomy from political interests.Conclusions: The establishment of KTPs is a promising development in supporting EIHP. Real-time lesson drawing from the experiences of KTPs can support improvements in the functioning of KTPs in the short term, while making the case for sustaining their work in the long term. Lessons learned can help to promote similar EIHP initiatives in other countries.