SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 14: Organising and using policy dialogues to support evidence-informed policymaking
SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 14: Organising and using policy dialogues to support evidence-informed policymaking
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/1478-4505-7-s1-s14
复制
发表时间：
2009-12-16
影响因子：
4
通讯作者：
Fretheim, Atle
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Lavis, John N.;Boyko, Jennifer A.;Fretheim, Atle
政策对话允许将研究证据与那些将参与有关高度优先问题的未来决策或受其影响的人的观点、经验和隐性知识一起考虑。多种因素推动了人们对政策对话的兴趣日益浓厚： 1. 认识到政策制定者和其他利益相关者需要根据当地情况提供“决策支持” 2. 认识到研究证据只是政策制定者和其他利益相关者决策过程中的一种输入 3. 认识到许多利益相关者可以为这些过程增加重要价值，以及 4. 认识到许多利益相关者可以采取行动 解决高度优先的问题，而不仅仅是政策制定者。在本文中，我们提出了一些问题来指导组织和使用政策对话来支持循证决策。它们是： 1. 对话是否涉及高度优先的问题？ 2. 对话是否提供了讨论问题的机会、解决问题的选项以及实施的关键考虑因素？ 3. 对话是否以预先分发的政策简报和对可能影响政策制定过程的各种因素的讨论为基础？ 4. 对话是否确保参与该问题未来决策或受其影响的人员的公平代表性？ 5. 对话是否有协调人，遵循不向个人发表评论的规则，并且不以达成共识为目标？ 6. 是否已产生产出并开展后续活动来支持行动？
Policy dialogues allow research evidence to be considered together with the views, experiences and tacit knowledge of those who will be involved in, or affected by, future decisions about a high-priority issue. Increasing interest in the use of policy dialogues has been fuelled by a number of factors: 1. The recognition of the need for locally contextualised 'decision support' for policymakers and other stakeholders 2. The recognition that research evidence is only one input into the decision-making processes of policymakers and other stakeholders 3. The recognition that many stakeholders can add significant value to these processes, and 4. The recognition that many stakeholders can take action to address high-priority issues, and not just policymakers. In this article, we suggest questions to guide those organising and using policy dialogues to support evidence-informed policymaking. These are: 1. Does the dialogue address a high-priority issue? 2. Does the dialogue provide opportunities to discuss the problem, options to address the problem, and key implementation considerations? 3. Is the dialogue informed by a pre-circulated policy brief and by a discussion about the full range of factors that can influence the policymaking process? 4. Does the dialogue ensure fair representation among those who will be involved in, or affected by, future decisions related to the issue? 5. Does the dialogue engage a facilitator, follow a rule about not attributing comments to individuals, and not aim for consensus? 6. Are outputs produced and follow-up activities undertaken to support action?