Cargando…

Evidence use in equity focused health impact assessment: a realist evaluation

BACKGROUND: Equity-focused health impact assessment (EFHIA) can function as a framework and tool that supports users to collate data, information, and evidence related to health equity in order to identify and mitigate the impact of a current or proposed initiative on health inequities. Despite educ...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tyler, Ingrid, Pauly, Bernie, Wang, Jenney, Patterson, Tobie, Bourgeault, Ivy, Manson, Heather
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6390302/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30808317
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-6534-6
_version_ 1783398114527281152
author Tyler, Ingrid
Pauly, Bernie
Wang, Jenney
Patterson, Tobie
Bourgeault, Ivy
Manson, Heather
author_facet Tyler, Ingrid
Pauly, Bernie
Wang, Jenney
Patterson, Tobie
Bourgeault, Ivy
Manson, Heather
author_sort Tyler, Ingrid
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Equity-focused health impact assessment (EFHIA) can function as a framework and tool that supports users to collate data, information, and evidence related to health equity in order to identify and mitigate the impact of a current or proposed initiative on health inequities. Despite education efforts in both the clinical and public health settings, practitioners have found implementation and the use of evidence in completing equity focussed assessment tools to be challenging. METHODS: We conducted a realist evaluation of evidence use in EFHIA in three phases: 1) developing propositions informed by a literature scan, existing theoretical frameworks, and stakeholder engagement; 2) data collection at four case study sites using online surveys, semi-structured interviews, document analysis, and observation; and 3) a realist analysis and identification of context-mechanism-outcome patterns and demi-regularities. RESULTS: We identified limited use of academic evidence in EFHIA with two explanatory demi-regularities: 1) participants were unable to “identify with” academic sources, acknowledging that evidence based practice and use of academic literature was valued in their organization, but seen as less likely to provide answers needed for practice and 2) use of academic evidence was not associated with a perceived “positive return on investment” of participant energy and time. However, we found that knowledge brokering at the local site can facilitate evidence familiarity and manageability, increase user confidence in using evidence, and increase the likelihood of evidence use in future work. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study provide a realist perspective on evidence use in practice, specifically for EFHIA. These findings can inform ongoing development and refinement of various knowledge translation interventions, particularly for practitioners delivering front-line public health services.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6390302
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63903022019-03-19 Evidence use in equity focused health impact assessment: a realist evaluation Tyler, Ingrid Pauly, Bernie Wang, Jenney Patterson, Tobie Bourgeault, Ivy Manson, Heather BMC Public Health Research Article BACKGROUND: Equity-focused health impact assessment (EFHIA) can function as a framework and tool that supports users to collate data, information, and evidence related to health equity in order to identify and mitigate the impact of a current or proposed initiative on health inequities. Despite education efforts in both the clinical and public health settings, practitioners have found implementation and the use of evidence in completing equity focussed assessment tools to be challenging. METHODS: We conducted a realist evaluation of evidence use in EFHIA in three phases: 1) developing propositions informed by a literature scan, existing theoretical frameworks, and stakeholder engagement; 2) data collection at four case study sites using online surveys, semi-structured interviews, document analysis, and observation; and 3) a realist analysis and identification of context-mechanism-outcome patterns and demi-regularities. RESULTS: We identified limited use of academic evidence in EFHIA with two explanatory demi-regularities: 1) participants were unable to “identify with” academic sources, acknowledging that evidence based practice and use of academic literature was valued in their organization, but seen as less likely to provide answers needed for practice and 2) use of academic evidence was not associated with a perceived “positive return on investment” of participant energy and time. However, we found that knowledge brokering at the local site can facilitate evidence familiarity and manageability, increase user confidence in using evidence, and increase the likelihood of evidence use in future work. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study provide a realist perspective on evidence use in practice, specifically for EFHIA. These findings can inform ongoing development and refinement of various knowledge translation interventions, particularly for practitioners delivering front-line public health services. BioMed Central 2019-02-26 /pmc/articles/PMC6390302/ /pubmed/30808317 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-6534-6 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 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
Tyler, Ingrid
Pauly, Bernie
Wang, Jenney
Patterson, Tobie
Bourgeault, Ivy
Manson, Heather
Evidence use in equity focused health impact assessment: a realist evaluation
title Evidence use in equity focused health impact assessment: a realist evaluation
title_full Evidence use in equity focused health impact assessment: a realist evaluation
title_fullStr Evidence use in equity focused health impact assessment: a realist evaluation
title_full_unstemmed Evidence use in equity focused health impact assessment: a realist evaluation
title_short Evidence use in equity focused health impact assessment: a realist evaluation
title_sort evidence use in equity focused health impact assessment: a realist evaluation
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6390302/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30808317
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-6534-6
work_keys_str_mv AT tyleringrid evidenceuseinequityfocusedhealthimpactassessmentarealistevaluation
AT paulybernie evidenceuseinequityfocusedhealthimpactassessmentarealistevaluation
AT wangjenney evidenceuseinequityfocusedhealthimpactassessmentarealistevaluation
AT pattersontobie evidenceuseinequityfocusedhealthimpactassessmentarealistevaluation
AT bourgeaultivy evidenceuseinequityfocusedhealthimpactassessmentarealistevaluation
AT mansonheather evidenceuseinequityfocusedhealthimpactassessmentarealistevaluation