Systematic reviews addressing identified health policy priorities in Eastern Mediterranean countries: a situational analysis

Health Research Policy and Systems

Rawan Hammoud²  Racha Fadlallah³  Chaza Akik⁵  Ola Kdouh²  Lama Bou Karroum³  Elie A Akl⁴  Fadi El-Jardali¹ 

[1] Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, CRL-209, 1280 Main St. West, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4 K1, Canada;Department of Health Management and Policy, American University of Beirut, PO Box 11-0236, Riad El Solh, Beirut 1107 2020, Lebanon;Center for Systematic Reviews of Health Policy and Systems Research (SPARK), American University of Beirut, PO Box 11-0236, Riad El Solh, Beirut 1107 2020, Lebanon;Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut, PO Box 11-0236, Riad El Solh, Beirut 1107 2020, Lebanon;Department of Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel St, Bloomsbury, London WC1E 7HT, UK

关键词: Systematic reviews;    Policy priorities;    Health policy and systems research;    Eastern Mediterranean region;   

Others  :  1177335
DOI  :  10.1186/1478-4505-12-48

 received in 2013-12-03, accepted in 2014-08-09,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Systematic reviews can offer policymakers and stakeholders concise, transparent, and relevant evidence pertaining to pressing policy priorities to help inform the decision-making process. The production and the use of systematic reviews are specifically limited in the Eastern Mediterranean region. The extent to which published systematic reviews address policy priorities in the region is still unknown. This situational analysis exercise aims at assessing the extent to which published systematic reviews address policy priorities identified by policymakers and stakeholders in Eastern Mediterranean region countries. It also provides an overview about the state of systematic review production in the region and identifies knowledge gaps.

Methods

We conducted a systematic search of the Health System Evidence database to identify published systematic reviews on policy-relevant priorities pertaining to the following themes: human resources for health, health financing, the role of the non-state sector, and access to medicine. Priorities were identified from two priority-setting exercises conducted in the region. We described the distribution of these systematic reviews across themes, sub-themes, authors’ affiliations, and countries where included primary studies were conducted.

Results

Out of the 1,045 systematic reviews identified in Health System Evidence on selected themes, a total of 200 systematic reviews (19.1%) addressed the priorities from the Eastern Mediterranean region. The theme with the largest number of systematic reviews included was human resources for health (115) followed by health financing (33), access to medicine (27), and role of the non-state sector (25). Authors based in the region produced only three systematic reviews addressing regional priorities (1.5%). Furthermore, no systematic review focused on the Eastern Mediterranean region. Primary studies from the region had limited contribution to systematic reviews; 17 systematic reviews (8.5%) included primary studies conducted in the region.

Conclusions

There are still gaps in the production of systematic reviews addressing policymakers’ and stakeholders’ priorities in the Eastern Mediterranean region. Efforts should be directed towards better aligning systematic review production with policy needs and priorities. Study findings can inform the agendas of researchers, research institutions, and international funding agencies of priority areas where systematic reviews are required.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 El-Jardali et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

Figure 6.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Lavis JN, Ross SE, Hurley JE, Hohendal JM, Stoddart GL, Woodward CA, Ableson J: Examining the role of health services research in public policymaking. Milbank Q 2002, 80(1):125-154.
• [2]Campbell DM, Redman S, Jorm L, Cooke M, Zwi AB, Rychetnik L: Increasing the use of evidence in health policy: practice and views of policymakers and researchers. Aust New Zealand Health Policy 2009, 6:21.
• [3]Lavis J, Davies H, Oxman A, Denis JL, Golden-Biddle K, Ferlie E: Towards systematic reviews that inform health care management and policy-making. J Health Serv Res Policy 2005, 10(Suppl 1):35-48.
• [4]Egger M, Davey Smith G, Altman DG (Eds): Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Meta-Analysis in Context. 2nd edition. London: BMJ Books; 2001.
• [5]Law TJ, Lavis JN, Hamandi A, Cheung A, El-Jardali F: Climate for evidence-informed health systems: A profile of systematic review production in 41 low- and middle-income countries, 1996–2008. J Health Serv Res Policy 2012, 17:4.
• [6]El-Jardali F, Ataya N, Jamal D, Jaafar M: A multi-faceted approach to promote knowledge translation platforms in Eastern Mediterranean countries: climate for evidence-informed policy. Health Res Policy Syst 2012, 10:15.
• [7]Hyder AA, Corluka A, Winch PJ, El-Shinnawy A, Ghassany H, Malekafzali H, Lim M-K, Mfusto-Bengo J, Segura E, GHaffar A: National policy-makers speak out: are researchers giving them what they need? Health Policy Plan 2011, 26(1):73-82.
• [8]El-Jardali F, Lavis JN, Ataya N, Jamal D, Ammar W, Raouf S: Use of health systems evidence by policymakers in Eastern Mediterranean countries: views: practices and contextual influences. BMC Health Serv Res 2012, 12:200.
• [9]Lavis JN, Lomas J, Hamid M, Sewankambo NK: Assessing country-level efforts to link research to action. Bull World Health Organ 2006, 84:620-628.
• [10]Innvaer S, Vist G, Trommald M, Oxman A: Health policy-makers’ perceptions of their use of evidence: a systematic review. J Health Serv Res Policy 2002, 7:239-244.
• [11]Ranson MK, Bennett S: Priority setting and health policy and systems research. Health Res Policy Syst 2009, 7:27.
• [12]El-Jardali F, Makhoul J, Jamal D, Ranson MK, Kronfol N, Tchaghchagian V: Eliciting policymakers’ and stakeholders’ opinions to help shape health system research priorities in the Middle East and North Africa region. Health Policy Plan 2010, 25(1):1-13.
• [13]Rashidian A, Zaidi S, Jabbour S, Soleymani F, Jahanmehr N: Identification of Priority Policy Research Questions in the area of Access to and Use of Medicines in EMRO Countries: Focusing on Iran, Pakistan, and Lebanon. Geneva: The Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research; 2011.
• [14]World Health Organization (WHO): Everybody’s Business, Strengthening Health Systems to Improve Health Outcomes: WHO’s Framework for Action. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2007.
• [15]Schieber G, Maeda A, Klingen N: Health Reform in the MENA Region, Volume 5(1). Cairo: Economic Research Forum; 1998.
• [16]Alliance for Health Systems and Policy Research: About the Alliance HPSR. [http://www.who.int/alliance-hpsr/about/en webcite] Accessed July 15, 2013
• [17]World Health Organization (WHO): The World Health Report: Working Together for Health. Geneva: WHO; 2006.
• [18]Management Sciences for Health: HRH Action Framework: Guide to Develop and Implement Strategies to Achieve an Effective and Sustainable Health Workforce. 2009.
• [19]Schieber G, Baeza C, Kress D, Maier M: Financing health systems in the 21st century. In Disease Control Priorities in Developing Countries. 2nd edition. Edited by Jamison DT, Breman JG, Measham AR. Washington (DC): World Bank; 2006:225-224.
• [20]World Health Organization (WHO): Equitable Access To Essential Medicines: A Framework For Collective Action. WHO Policy Perspectives on Medicine. Geneva: WHO; 2004.
• [21]Green A: The role of non-governmental organizations and the private sector in the provision of health care in developing countries. Int J Health Plan M 1987, 2:37-58.
• [22]Patouillard E, Goodman CA, Hanson KG, Mills AJ: Can working with the private for-profit sector improve utilization of quality health services by the poor? A systematic review of the literature. Int J Equity Health 2007, 6:17.
• [23]Fleiss JL, Levin B, Paik MC: The measurement of interrater agreement. Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions 3rd edition. 2004, 212-236.
• [24]Landis JR, Koch GG: The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977, 33(1):159-174.
• [25]Wilson MG, Lavis JN, Moat K: The global stock of research evidence relevant to health systems policymaking. Health Res Policy Syst 2013, 11:32.
• [26]El-Jardali F, Jamal D, Ataya N, Jaafar M, Raouf S, Matta C, Michael S, Smith C: Health policy and systems research in twelve Eastern Mediterranean countries: a stocktaking of production and gaps (2000–2008). Health Res Policy Syst 2011, 9:39.