Cargando…
Supporting the use of research evidence in decision-making in crisis zones in low- and middle-income countries: a critical interpretive synthesis
BACKGROUND: Decision-makers in crisis zones are faced with the challenge of having to make health-related decisions under limited time and resource constraints and in light of the many factors that can influence their decisions, of which research evidence is just one. To address a key gap in the res...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7027202/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32070370 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-020-0530-2 |
_version_ | 1783498821268930560 |
---|---|
author | Khalid, Ahmad Firas Lavis, John N. El-Jardali, Fadi Vanstone, Meredith |
author_facet | Khalid, Ahmad Firas Lavis, John N. El-Jardali, Fadi Vanstone, Meredith |
author_sort | Khalid, Ahmad Firas |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Decision-makers in crisis zones are faced with the challenge of having to make health-related decisions under limited time and resource constraints and in light of the many factors that can influence their decisions, of which research evidence is just one. To address a key gap in the research literature about how best to support the use of research evidence in such situations, we conducted a critical interpretive synthesis approach to develop a conceptual framework that outlines the strategies that leverage the facilitators and address the barriers to evidence use in crisis zones. METHODS: We systematically reviewed both empirical and non-empirical literature and used an interpretive analytic approach to synthesise the results and develop the conceptual framework. We used a ‘compass’ question to create a detailed search strategy and conducted electronic searches in CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, SSCI and Web of Science. A second reviewer was assigned to a representative sample of articles. We purposively sampled additional papers to fill in conceptual gaps. RESULTS: We identified 21 eligible papers to be analysed and purposively sampled an additional 6 to fill conceptual gaps. The synthesis resulted in a conceptual framework that focuses on evidence use in crisis zones examined through the lens of four systems – political, health, international humanitarian aid and health research. Within each of the four systems, the framework identifies the most actionable strategies that leverage the facilitators and address the barriers to evidence use. CONCLUSIONS: This study presents a new conceptual framework that outlines strategies that leverage the facilitators and address the barriers to evidence use in crisis zones within different systems. This study expands on the literature pertaining to evidence-informed decision-making. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7027202 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-70272022020-02-24 Supporting the use of research evidence in decision-making in crisis zones in low- and middle-income countries: a critical interpretive synthesis Khalid, Ahmad Firas Lavis, John N. El-Jardali, Fadi Vanstone, Meredith Health Res Policy Syst Research BACKGROUND: Decision-makers in crisis zones are faced with the challenge of having to make health-related decisions under limited time and resource constraints and in light of the many factors that can influence their decisions, of which research evidence is just one. To address a key gap in the research literature about how best to support the use of research evidence in such situations, we conducted a critical interpretive synthesis approach to develop a conceptual framework that outlines the strategies that leverage the facilitators and address the barriers to evidence use in crisis zones. METHODS: We systematically reviewed both empirical and non-empirical literature and used an interpretive analytic approach to synthesise the results and develop the conceptual framework. We used a ‘compass’ question to create a detailed search strategy and conducted electronic searches in CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, SSCI and Web of Science. A second reviewer was assigned to a representative sample of articles. We purposively sampled additional papers to fill in conceptual gaps. RESULTS: We identified 21 eligible papers to be analysed and purposively sampled an additional 6 to fill conceptual gaps. The synthesis resulted in a conceptual framework that focuses on evidence use in crisis zones examined through the lens of four systems – political, health, international humanitarian aid and health research. Within each of the four systems, the framework identifies the most actionable strategies that leverage the facilitators and address the barriers to evidence use. CONCLUSIONS: This study presents a new conceptual framework that outlines strategies that leverage the facilitators and address the barriers to evidence use in crisis zones within different systems. This study expands on the literature pertaining to evidence-informed decision-making. BioMed Central 2020-02-18 /pmc/articles/PMC7027202/ /pubmed/32070370 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-020-0530-2 Text en © The Author(s). 2020 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 Khalid, Ahmad Firas Lavis, John N. El-Jardali, Fadi Vanstone, Meredith Supporting the use of research evidence in decision-making in crisis zones in low- and middle-income countries: a critical interpretive synthesis |
title | Supporting the use of research evidence in decision-making in crisis zones in low- and middle-income countries: a critical interpretive synthesis |
title_full | Supporting the use of research evidence in decision-making in crisis zones in low- and middle-income countries: a critical interpretive synthesis |
title_fullStr | Supporting the use of research evidence in decision-making in crisis zones in low- and middle-income countries: a critical interpretive synthesis |
title_full_unstemmed | Supporting the use of research evidence in decision-making in crisis zones in low- and middle-income countries: a critical interpretive synthesis |
title_short | Supporting the use of research evidence in decision-making in crisis zones in low- and middle-income countries: a critical interpretive synthesis |
title_sort | supporting the use of research evidence in decision-making in crisis zones in low- and middle-income countries: a critical interpretive synthesis |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7027202/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32070370 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-020-0530-2 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT khalidahmadfiras supportingtheuseofresearchevidenceindecisionmakingincrisiszonesinlowandmiddleincomecountriesacriticalinterpretivesynthesis AT lavisjohnn supportingtheuseofresearchevidenceindecisionmakingincrisiszonesinlowandmiddleincomecountriesacriticalinterpretivesynthesis AT eljardalifadi supportingtheuseofresearchevidenceindecisionmakingincrisiszonesinlowandmiddleincomecountriesacriticalinterpretivesynthesis AT vanstonemeredith supportingtheuseofresearchevidenceindecisionmakingincrisiszonesinlowandmiddleincomecountriesacriticalinterpretivesynthesis |