Cargando…

Evidence for Health II: Overcoming barriers to using evidence in policy and practice

Even the highest quality evidence will have little impact unless it is incorporated into decision-making for health. It is therefore critical to overcome the many barriers to using evidence in decision-making, including (1) missing the window of opportunity, (2) knowledge gaps and uncertainty, (3) c...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Andermann, Anne, Pang, Tikki, Newton, John N., Davis, Adrian, Panisset, Ulysses
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4791839/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26975200
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-016-0086-3
_version_ 1782421145402736640
author Andermann, Anne
Pang, Tikki
Newton, John N.
Davis, Adrian
Panisset, Ulysses
author_facet Andermann, Anne
Pang, Tikki
Newton, John N.
Davis, Adrian
Panisset, Ulysses
author_sort Andermann, Anne
collection PubMed
description Even the highest quality evidence will have little impact unless it is incorporated into decision-making for health. It is therefore critical to overcome the many barriers to using evidence in decision-making, including (1) missing the window of opportunity, (2) knowledge gaps and uncertainty, (3) controversy, irrelevant and conflicting evidence, as well as (4) vested interests and conflicts of interest. While this is certainly not a comprehensive list, it covers a number of main themes discussed in the knowledge translation literature on this topic, and better understanding these barriers can help readers of the evidence to be more savvy knowledge users and help researchers overcome challenges to getting their evidence into practice. Thus, the first step in being able to use research evidence for improving population health is ensuring that the evidence is available at the right time and in the right format and language so that knowledge users can take the evidence into consideration alongside a multitude of other factors that also influence decision-making. The sheer volume of scientific publications makes it difficult to find the evidence that can actually help inform decisions for health. Policymakers, especially in low- and middle-income countries, require context-specific evidence to ensure local relevance. Knowledge synthesis and dissemination of policy-relevant local evidence is important, but it is still not enough. There are times when the interpretation of the evidence leads to various controversies and disagreements, which act as barriers to the uptake of evidence. Research evidence can also be influenced and misused for various aims and agendas. It is therefore important to ensure that any new evidence comes from reliable sources and is interpreted in light of the overall body of scientific literature. It is not enough to simply produce evidence, nor even to synthesize and package evidence into a more user-friendly format. Particularly at the policy level, political savvy is also needed to ensure that vested interests do not undermine decisions that can impact the health of individuals and populations.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4791839
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47918392016-03-16 Evidence for Health II: Overcoming barriers to using evidence in policy and practice Andermann, Anne Pang, Tikki Newton, John N. Davis, Adrian Panisset, Ulysses Health Res Policy Syst Review Even the highest quality evidence will have little impact unless it is incorporated into decision-making for health. It is therefore critical to overcome the many barriers to using evidence in decision-making, including (1) missing the window of opportunity, (2) knowledge gaps and uncertainty, (3) controversy, irrelevant and conflicting evidence, as well as (4) vested interests and conflicts of interest. While this is certainly not a comprehensive list, it covers a number of main themes discussed in the knowledge translation literature on this topic, and better understanding these barriers can help readers of the evidence to be more savvy knowledge users and help researchers overcome challenges to getting their evidence into practice. Thus, the first step in being able to use research evidence for improving population health is ensuring that the evidence is available at the right time and in the right format and language so that knowledge users can take the evidence into consideration alongside a multitude of other factors that also influence decision-making. The sheer volume of scientific publications makes it difficult to find the evidence that can actually help inform decisions for health. Policymakers, especially in low- and middle-income countries, require context-specific evidence to ensure local relevance. Knowledge synthesis and dissemination of policy-relevant local evidence is important, but it is still not enough. There are times when the interpretation of the evidence leads to various controversies and disagreements, which act as barriers to the uptake of evidence. Research evidence can also be influenced and misused for various aims and agendas. It is therefore important to ensure that any new evidence comes from reliable sources and is interpreted in light of the overall body of scientific literature. It is not enough to simply produce evidence, nor even to synthesize and package evidence into a more user-friendly format. Particularly at the policy level, political savvy is also needed to ensure that vested interests do not undermine decisions that can impact the health of individuals and populations. BioMed Central 2016-03-14 /pmc/articles/PMC4791839/ /pubmed/26975200 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-016-0086-3 Text en © Andermann et al. 2016 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 Review
Andermann, Anne
Pang, Tikki
Newton, John N.
Davis, Adrian
Panisset, Ulysses
Evidence for Health II: Overcoming barriers to using evidence in policy and practice
title Evidence for Health II: Overcoming barriers to using evidence in policy and practice
title_full Evidence for Health II: Overcoming barriers to using evidence in policy and practice
title_fullStr Evidence for Health II: Overcoming barriers to using evidence in policy and practice
title_full_unstemmed Evidence for Health II: Overcoming barriers to using evidence in policy and practice
title_short Evidence for Health II: Overcoming barriers to using evidence in policy and practice
title_sort evidence for health ii: overcoming barriers to using evidence in policy and practice
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4791839/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26975200
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-016-0086-3
work_keys_str_mv AT andermannanne evidenceforhealthiiovercomingbarrierstousingevidenceinpolicyandpractice
AT pangtikki evidenceforhealthiiovercomingbarrierstousingevidenceinpolicyandpractice
AT newtonjohnn evidenceforhealthiiovercomingbarrierstousingevidenceinpolicyandpractice
AT davisadrian evidenceforhealthiiovercomingbarrierstousingevidenceinpolicyandpractice
AT panissetulysses evidenceforhealthiiovercomingbarrierstousingevidenceinpolicyandpractice