Cargando…

Key Factors Influencing Use of Immunization Cost Evidence in Country Planning and Budgeting Processes: Experiences From Indonesia, Tanzania, and Vietnam

In many low- and middle-income countries, planning cycles and policy decisions are not always informed by cost evidence, even where relevant and recent cost evidence is available. The Immunization Costing Action Network (ICAN) project was a research and learning community designed to strengthen coun...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ozaltin, Annette, Vaughan, Kelsey, Tani, Kassimu, Manzi, Fatuma, Mai, Vu Quynh, Van Minh, Hoang, Kosen, Soewarta, Shimp, Lora, Brenzel, Logan, Boonstoppel, Laura
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Global Health: Science and Practice 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8885341/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35294377
http://dx.doi.org/10.9745/GHSP-D-21-00264
_version_ 1784660392875655168
author Ozaltin, Annette
Vaughan, Kelsey
Tani, Kassimu
Manzi, Fatuma
Mai, Vu Quynh
Van Minh, Hoang
Kosen, Soewarta
Shimp, Lora
Brenzel, Logan
Boonstoppel, Laura
author_facet Ozaltin, Annette
Vaughan, Kelsey
Tani, Kassimu
Manzi, Fatuma
Mai, Vu Quynh
Van Minh, Hoang
Kosen, Soewarta
Shimp, Lora
Brenzel, Logan
Boonstoppel, Laura
author_sort Ozaltin, Annette
collection PubMed
description In many low- and middle-income countries, planning cycles and policy decisions are not always informed by cost evidence, even where relevant and recent cost evidence is available. The Immunization Costing Action Network (ICAN) project was a research and learning community designed to strengthen country capacity to generate immunization cost evidence and to understand and improve the evidence-to-policy linkages for the evidence. We identified key factors that increase the likelihood that health policy makers will use evidence for policy making or planning, which shaped the development of a 6-step evidence to policy and practice (EPP) facilitated process. ICAN used the EPP process in Indonesia, Tanzania, and Vietnam from 2016–2019. The experience resulted in several insights regarding country priorities related to cost evidence and factors that determine uptake. Cost evidence is more likely to be used if it answers a specific policy question prioritized by the immunization program, while the use case is less clear and urgent for routine planning and program management. Nonhealth ministries and subnational stakeholders can provide important perspectives to inform the research and its usability. The use case for evidence should be revisited periodically as divergences from formal planning cycles are common and new policy windows open. Ensuring evidence is available at the right time is critical, even if this requires a sacrifice between rigor and speed. Engaging a small group of stakeholders, rather than an individual, to champion the research may be more effective, and the research has greater legitimacy if it is produced by multidisciplinary country teams. Evidence and messages should be tailored for and packaged targeting different audiences. Going forward, continued support is necessary to bridge the divide between those who generate cost evidence and those who translate evidence for policy and planning decisions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8885341
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Global Health: Science and Practice
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88853412022-04-01 Key Factors Influencing Use of Immunization Cost Evidence in Country Planning and Budgeting Processes: Experiences From Indonesia, Tanzania, and Vietnam Ozaltin, Annette Vaughan, Kelsey Tani, Kassimu Manzi, Fatuma Mai, Vu Quynh Van Minh, Hoang Kosen, Soewarta Shimp, Lora Brenzel, Logan Boonstoppel, Laura Glob Health Sci Pract Field Action Report In many low- and middle-income countries, planning cycles and policy decisions are not always informed by cost evidence, even where relevant and recent cost evidence is available. The Immunization Costing Action Network (ICAN) project was a research and learning community designed to strengthen country capacity to generate immunization cost evidence and to understand and improve the evidence-to-policy linkages for the evidence. We identified key factors that increase the likelihood that health policy makers will use evidence for policy making or planning, which shaped the development of a 6-step evidence to policy and practice (EPP) facilitated process. ICAN used the EPP process in Indonesia, Tanzania, and Vietnam from 2016–2019. The experience resulted in several insights regarding country priorities related to cost evidence and factors that determine uptake. Cost evidence is more likely to be used if it answers a specific policy question prioritized by the immunization program, while the use case is less clear and urgent for routine planning and program management. Nonhealth ministries and subnational stakeholders can provide important perspectives to inform the research and its usability. The use case for evidence should be revisited periodically as divergences from formal planning cycles are common and new policy windows open. Ensuring evidence is available at the right time is critical, even if this requires a sacrifice between rigor and speed. Engaging a small group of stakeholders, rather than an individual, to champion the research may be more effective, and the research has greater legitimacy if it is produced by multidisciplinary country teams. Evidence and messages should be tailored for and packaged targeting different audiences. Going forward, continued support is necessary to bridge the divide between those who generate cost evidence and those who translate evidence for policy and planning decisions. Global Health: Science and Practice 2022-02-28 /pmc/articles/PMC8885341/ /pubmed/35294377 http://dx.doi.org/10.9745/GHSP-D-21-00264 Text en © Ozaltin et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly cited. To view a copy of the license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. When linking to this article, please use the following permanent link: https://doi.org/10.9745/GHSP-D-21-00264
spellingShingle Field Action Report
Ozaltin, Annette
Vaughan, Kelsey
Tani, Kassimu
Manzi, Fatuma
Mai, Vu Quynh
Van Minh, Hoang
Kosen, Soewarta
Shimp, Lora
Brenzel, Logan
Boonstoppel, Laura
Key Factors Influencing Use of Immunization Cost Evidence in Country Planning and Budgeting Processes: Experiences From Indonesia, Tanzania, and Vietnam
title Key Factors Influencing Use of Immunization Cost Evidence in Country Planning and Budgeting Processes: Experiences From Indonesia, Tanzania, and Vietnam
title_full Key Factors Influencing Use of Immunization Cost Evidence in Country Planning and Budgeting Processes: Experiences From Indonesia, Tanzania, and Vietnam
title_fullStr Key Factors Influencing Use of Immunization Cost Evidence in Country Planning and Budgeting Processes: Experiences From Indonesia, Tanzania, and Vietnam
title_full_unstemmed Key Factors Influencing Use of Immunization Cost Evidence in Country Planning and Budgeting Processes: Experiences From Indonesia, Tanzania, and Vietnam
title_short Key Factors Influencing Use of Immunization Cost Evidence in Country Planning and Budgeting Processes: Experiences From Indonesia, Tanzania, and Vietnam
title_sort key factors influencing use of immunization cost evidence in country planning and budgeting processes: experiences from indonesia, tanzania, and vietnam
topic Field Action Report
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8885341/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35294377
http://dx.doi.org/10.9745/GHSP-D-21-00264
work_keys_str_mv AT ozaltinannette keyfactorsinfluencinguseofimmunizationcostevidenceincountryplanningandbudgetingprocessesexperiencesfromindonesiatanzaniaandvietnam
AT vaughankelsey keyfactorsinfluencinguseofimmunizationcostevidenceincountryplanningandbudgetingprocessesexperiencesfromindonesiatanzaniaandvietnam
AT tanikassimu keyfactorsinfluencinguseofimmunizationcostevidenceincountryplanningandbudgetingprocessesexperiencesfromindonesiatanzaniaandvietnam
AT manzifatuma keyfactorsinfluencinguseofimmunizationcostevidenceincountryplanningandbudgetingprocessesexperiencesfromindonesiatanzaniaandvietnam
AT maivuquynh keyfactorsinfluencinguseofimmunizationcostevidenceincountryplanningandbudgetingprocessesexperiencesfromindonesiatanzaniaandvietnam
AT vanminhhoang keyfactorsinfluencinguseofimmunizationcostevidenceincountryplanningandbudgetingprocessesexperiencesfromindonesiatanzaniaandvietnam
AT kosensoewarta keyfactorsinfluencinguseofimmunizationcostevidenceincountryplanningandbudgetingprocessesexperiencesfromindonesiatanzaniaandvietnam
AT shimplora keyfactorsinfluencinguseofimmunizationcostevidenceincountryplanningandbudgetingprocessesexperiencesfromindonesiatanzaniaandvietnam
AT brenzellogan keyfactorsinfluencinguseofimmunizationcostevidenceincountryplanningandbudgetingprocessesexperiencesfromindonesiatanzaniaandvietnam
AT boonstoppellaura keyfactorsinfluencinguseofimmunizationcostevidenceincountryplanningandbudgetingprocessesexperiencesfromindonesiatanzaniaandvietnam