Embedding rapid reviews in health policy and systems decision-making: Impacts and lessons learned from four low- and middle-income countries

Health Research Policy and Systems

Review

Robert Marten¹  Rajani R. Ved²  Nur Zahirah Balqis-Ali³  Shakirah Md. Sharif³  Sondi Sararaks³  Jesmin Antony⁴  Sonia M. Thomas⁴  Melissa Courvoisier⁴  Reid C. Robson⁴  Sharon E. Straus⁵  Andrea C. Tricco⁶  Krystle Amog⁷  Soumyadeep Bhaumik⁸  Rugare Abigail Kangwende⁹  Étienne V. Langlois^1,10  Ivdity Chikovani^1,11  Ismael Kawooya^1,12  Rhona Mijumbi^1,12  Devaki Nambiar^1,13  Ronald Munatsi^1,14 

[1] Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research, Science Division, World Health Organization (WHO), Geneva, Switzerland;Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, New Delhi, India;Institute for Health Systems Research, National Institutes of Health, Ministry of Health, Putrajaya, Malaysia;Knowledge Translation Program, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael’s Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, 209 Victoria Street, 7th Floor, East Building, M5B 1T8, Toronto, ON, Canada;Knowledge Translation Program, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael’s Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, 209 Victoria Street, 7th Floor, East Building, M5B 1T8, Toronto, ON, Canada;Department of Geriatric Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada;Knowledge Translation Program, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael’s Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, 209 Victoria Street, 7th Floor, East Building, M5B 1T8, Toronto, ON, Canada;Epidemiology Division and Institute for Health, Management, and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada;Knowledge Translation Program, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael’s Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, 209 Victoria Street, 7th Floor, East Building, M5B 1T8, Toronto, ON, Canada;Institute of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada;Meta-Research & Evidence Synthesis Unit, The George Institute for Global Health, New Delhi, India;Ministry of Health and Child Care, Harare, Zimbabwe;Partnership for Maternal, Newborn and Child Health (PMNCH), World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland;Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research, Science Division, World Health Organization (WHO), Geneva, Switzerland;Research Department, Curatio International Foundation, Tbilisi, Georgia;The Center for Rapid Evidence Synthesis (ACRES), Regional East African Policy Initiative, Uganda Node, Makerere University College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda;The George Institute for Global Health, New Delhi, India;Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia;Prasanna School of Public Health, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India;Zimbabwe Evidence-Informed Policy Network (ZeipNET), Harare, Zimbabwe;

关键词: Capacity-building;    Low- and middle-income economy countries;    Knowledge synthesis;    Policy decision-making;    Rapid reviews;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s12961-023-00992-w

 received in 2022-11-10, accepted in 2023-05-09,  发布年份 2023

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundDemand for rapid evidence-based syntheses to inform health policy and systems decision-making has increased worldwide, including in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). To promote use of rapid syntheses in LMICs, the WHO’s Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research (AHPSR) created the Embedding Rapid Reviews in Health Systems Decision-Making (ERA) Initiative. Following a call for proposals, four LMICs were selected (Georgia, India, Malaysia and Zimbabwe) and supported for 1 year to embed rapid response platforms within a public institution with a health policy or systems decision-making mandate.MethodsWhile the selected platforms had experience in health policy and systems research and evidence syntheses, platforms were less confident conducting rapid evidence syntheses. A technical assistance centre (TAC) was created from the outset to develop and lead a capacity-strengthening program for rapid syntheses, tailored to the platforms based on their original proposals and needs as assessed in a baseline questionnaire. The program included training in rapid synthesis methods, as well as generating synthesis demand, engaging knowledge users and ensuring knowledge uptake. Modalities included live training webinars, in-country workshops and support through phone, email and an online platform. LMICs provided regular updates on policy-makers’ requests and the rapid products provided, as well as barriers, facilitators and impacts. Post-initiative, platforms were surveyed.ResultsPlatforms provided rapid syntheses across a range of AHPSR themes, and successfully engaged national- and state-level policy-makers. Examples of substantial policy impact were observed, including for COVID-19. Although the post-initiative survey response rate was low, three quarters of those responding felt confident in their ability to conduct a rapid evidence synthesis. Lessons learned coalesced around three themes – the importance of context-specific expertise in conducting reviews, facilitating cross-platform learning, and planning for platform sustainability.ConclusionsThe ERA initiative successfully established rapid response platforms in four LMICs. The short timeframe limited the number of rapid products produced, but there were examples of substantial impact and growing demand. We emphasize that LMICs can and should be involved not only in identifying and articulating needs but as co-designers in their own capacity-strengthening programs. More time is required to assess whether these platforms will be sustained for the long-term.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© The Author(s) 2023

【 图 表 】

Fig. 5

Fig. 5

40517_2023_259_Article_IEq83.gif

40517_2023_259_Article_IEq82.gif