Improving institutional platforms for evidence-informed decision-making: getting beyond technical solutions

Health Research Policy and Systems

Commentary

Nasreen S. Jessani¹  Marco Liverani²  Jeffrey Mecaskey³  Rhona Mijumbi-Deve⁴  Ben Verboom⁵ 

[1] Centre for Evidence Based Health Care, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa;Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States of America;Department of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom;School of Tropical Medicine and Global Health, Nagasaki University, Nagasaki, Japan;HPI Institute, Berlin, Germany;The Center for Rapid Evidence Synthesis (ACRES), Kampala, Uganda;Africa Centre for Evidence, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa;University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom;

关键词: Evidence-informed decision-making;    Institutionalization;    Political economy;    Broker;    Intermediary;    Citizen panel;    Knowledge translation;    Evidence use;    Accountability;    Network;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s12961-022-00948-6

 received in 2022-06-28, accepted in 2022-11-25,  发布年份 2022

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

Purely technical interventions aimed at enhancing evidence-informed decision-making (EIDM) have rarely translated into organizational institutionalization or systems change. A panel of four presentations at the Health Systems Global 2020 conference provides a basis for inference about contextual factors that influence the establishment and sustainability of institutional platforms to support EIDM. These cases include local structures such as citizen panels in Uganda, regional knowledge translation structures such as the West African Health Organization, global multilateral initiatives such as the “One Health” Quadrapartite and regional public health networks in South-East Asia. They point to the importance of political economy as well as technical capability determinants of evidence uptake and utilization at institutional, organizational and individual levels. The cases also lend support to evidence that third-party (broker and intermediary) supportive institutions can facilitate EIDM processes. The involvement of third-party supranational organizations, however, poses challenges in terms of legitimacy and accountability.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© The Author(s) 2023