Cargando…

Evidence based policy making and the ‘art’ of commissioning – how English healthcare commissioners access and use information and academic research in ‘real life’ decision-making: an empirical qualitative study

BACKGROUND: Policymakers such as English healthcare commissioners are encouraged to adopt ‘evidence-based policy-making’, with ‘evidence’ defined by researchers as academic research. To learn how academic research can influence policy, researchers need to know more about commissioning, commissioners...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wye, Lesley, Brangan, Emer, Cameron, Ailsa, Gabbay, John, Klein, Jonathan H., Pope, Catherine
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4587739/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26416368
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-015-1091-x
_version_ 1782392506167590912
author Wye, Lesley
Brangan, Emer
Cameron, Ailsa
Gabbay, John
Klein, Jonathan H.
Pope, Catherine
author_facet Wye, Lesley
Brangan, Emer
Cameron, Ailsa
Gabbay, John
Klein, Jonathan H.
Pope, Catherine
author_sort Wye, Lesley
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Policymakers such as English healthcare commissioners are encouraged to adopt ‘evidence-based policy-making’, with ‘evidence’ defined by researchers as academic research. To learn how academic research can influence policy, researchers need to know more about commissioning, commissioners’ information seeking behaviour and the role of research in their decisions. METHODS: In case studies of four commissioning organisations, we interviewed 52 people including clinical and managerial commissioners, observed 14 commissioning meetings and collected documentation e.g. meeting minutes and reports. Using constant comparison, data were coded, summarised and analysed to facilitate cross case comparison. RESULTS: The ‘art of commissioning’ entails juggling competing agendas, priorities, power relationships, demands and personal inclinations to build a persuasive, compelling case. Policymakers sought information to identify options, navigate ways through, justify decisions and convince others to approve and/or follow the suggested course. ‘Evidence-based policy-making’ usually meant pragmatic selection of ‘evidence’ such as best practice guidance, clinicians’ and users’ views of services and innovations from elsewhere. Inconclusive or negative research was unhelpful in developing policymaking plans and did not inform disinvestment decisions. Information was exchanged through conversations and stories, which were fast, flexible and suited the rapidly changing world of policymaking. Local data often trumped national or research-based evidence. Local evaluations were more useful than academic research. DISCUSSION: Commissioners are highly pragmatic and will only use information that helps them create a compelling case for action.Therefore, researchers need to start producing more useful information. CONCLUSIONS: To influence policymakers’ decisions, researchers need to 1) learn more about local policymakers’ priorities 2) develop relationships of mutual benefit 3) use verbal instead of writtencommunication 4) work with intermediaries such as public health consultants and 5) co-produce local evaluations. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-015-1091-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4587739
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45877392015-09-30 Evidence based policy making and the ‘art’ of commissioning – how English healthcare commissioners access and use information and academic research in ‘real life’ decision-making: an empirical qualitative study Wye, Lesley Brangan, Emer Cameron, Ailsa Gabbay, John Klein, Jonathan H. Pope, Catherine BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: Policymakers such as English healthcare commissioners are encouraged to adopt ‘evidence-based policy-making’, with ‘evidence’ defined by researchers as academic research. To learn how academic research can influence policy, researchers need to know more about commissioning, commissioners’ information seeking behaviour and the role of research in their decisions. METHODS: In case studies of four commissioning organisations, we interviewed 52 people including clinical and managerial commissioners, observed 14 commissioning meetings and collected documentation e.g. meeting minutes and reports. Using constant comparison, data were coded, summarised and analysed to facilitate cross case comparison. RESULTS: The ‘art of commissioning’ entails juggling competing agendas, priorities, power relationships, demands and personal inclinations to build a persuasive, compelling case. Policymakers sought information to identify options, navigate ways through, justify decisions and convince others to approve and/or follow the suggested course. ‘Evidence-based policy-making’ usually meant pragmatic selection of ‘evidence’ such as best practice guidance, clinicians’ and users’ views of services and innovations from elsewhere. Inconclusive or negative research was unhelpful in developing policymaking plans and did not inform disinvestment decisions. Information was exchanged through conversations and stories, which were fast, flexible and suited the rapidly changing world of policymaking. Local data often trumped national or research-based evidence. Local evaluations were more useful than academic research. DISCUSSION: Commissioners are highly pragmatic and will only use information that helps them create a compelling case for action.Therefore, researchers need to start producing more useful information. CONCLUSIONS: To influence policymakers’ decisions, researchers need to 1) learn more about local policymakers’ priorities 2) develop relationships of mutual benefit 3) use verbal instead of writtencommunication 4) work with intermediaries such as public health consultants and 5) co-produce local evaluations. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-015-1091-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2015-09-29 /pmc/articles/PMC4587739/ /pubmed/26416368 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-015-1091-x Text en © Wye et al. 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Wye, Lesley
Brangan, Emer
Cameron, Ailsa
Gabbay, John
Klein, Jonathan H.
Pope, Catherine
Evidence based policy making and the ‘art’ of commissioning – how English healthcare commissioners access and use information and academic research in ‘real life’ decision-making: an empirical qualitative study
title Evidence based policy making and the ‘art’ of commissioning – how English healthcare commissioners access and use information and academic research in ‘real life’ decision-making: an empirical qualitative study
title_full Evidence based policy making and the ‘art’ of commissioning – how English healthcare commissioners access and use information and academic research in ‘real life’ decision-making: an empirical qualitative study
title_fullStr Evidence based policy making and the ‘art’ of commissioning – how English healthcare commissioners access and use information and academic research in ‘real life’ decision-making: an empirical qualitative study
title_full_unstemmed Evidence based policy making and the ‘art’ of commissioning – how English healthcare commissioners access and use information and academic research in ‘real life’ decision-making: an empirical qualitative study
title_short Evidence based policy making and the ‘art’ of commissioning – how English healthcare commissioners access and use information and academic research in ‘real life’ decision-making: an empirical qualitative study
title_sort evidence based policy making and the ‘art’ of commissioning – how english healthcare commissioners access and use information and academic research in ‘real life’ decision-making: an empirical qualitative study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4587739/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26416368
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-015-1091-x
work_keys_str_mv AT wyelesley evidencebasedpolicymakingandtheartofcommissioninghowenglishhealthcarecommissionersaccessanduseinformationandacademicresearchinreallifedecisionmakinganempiricalqualitativestudy
AT branganemer evidencebasedpolicymakingandtheartofcommissioninghowenglishhealthcarecommissionersaccessanduseinformationandacademicresearchinreallifedecisionmakinganempiricalqualitativestudy
AT cameronailsa evidencebasedpolicymakingandtheartofcommissioninghowenglishhealthcarecommissionersaccessanduseinformationandacademicresearchinreallifedecisionmakinganempiricalqualitativestudy
AT gabbayjohn evidencebasedpolicymakingandtheartofcommissioninghowenglishhealthcarecommissionersaccessanduseinformationandacademicresearchinreallifedecisionmakinganempiricalqualitativestudy
AT kleinjonathanh evidencebasedpolicymakingandtheartofcommissioninghowenglishhealthcarecommissionersaccessanduseinformationandacademicresearchinreallifedecisionmakinganempiricalqualitativestudy
AT popecatherine evidencebasedpolicymakingandtheartofcommissioninghowenglishhealthcarecommissionersaccessanduseinformationandacademicresearchinreallifedecisionmakinganempiricalqualitativestudy