ReviewJournal of epidemiology and community health2000
How are policy makers using evidence? Models of research utilisation and local NHS policy making.
Review in Journal of epidemiology and community health, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 73 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
73 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A content analysis of popular media reporting regarding increases in minimum ages of legal access for tobacco.BMC public health · 2018Pooled it
- Exploring the function and effectiveness of knowledge brokers as facilitators of knowledge translation in health-related settings: a systematic review and thematic analysis.Implementation science : IS · 2015Pooled it
- How contexts and issues influence the use of policy-relevant research syntheses: a critical interpretive synthesis.The Milbank quarterly · 2013Pooled it
- The use of research evidence in public health decision making processes: systematic review.PloS one · 2011Pooled it
- Knowledge exchange processes in organizations and policy arenas: a narrative systematic review of the literature.The Milbank quarterly · 2010Pooled it
- SciComm Optimizer for Policy Engagement: a randomized controlled trial of the SCOPE model on state legislators' research use in public discourse.Implementation science : IS · 2023Trial
- Selective or stepwise removal of deep caries in deciduous molars: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.Trials · 2015Trial
- An exploratory cluster randomised controlled trial of knowledge translation strategies to support evidence-informed decision-making in local governments (The KT4LG study).BMC public health · 2011Trial
- 'Stopping the start': support for proposed tobacco control policies - a population-based survey in Great Britain 2021-2023.Tobacco control · 2025Article
- The determinants of evidence use by Australian clinical networks as agents and stewards of safety and quality: a conceptual framework.Health research policy and systems · 2025Article
- The usage of data in NHS primary care commissioning: a realist review.BMC medicine · 2023Review
- Prostitutes, sailors and professionals - lived experiences of medical school students and staff with tattoos.MedEdPublish (2016) · 2023Article
- "You Can't Look at an Orange and Draw a Banana": Using Research Evidence to Develop Relevant Health Policy in Ghana.Global health, science and practice · 2022Article
- Open science at the science-policy interface: bringing in the evidence?Health research policy and systems · 2022Review
- Identifying competencies for integrated knowledge translation: a Delphi study.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- An embedded implementation research initiative to tackle service delivery bottlenecks in the expanded programme on immunisation in Pakistan: Overview and reflections.Journal of global health · 2021Review
- Enhancing psychological safety in mental health services.International journal of mental health systems · 2021Review
- Uncovering the processes of knowledge transformation: the example of local evidence-informed policy-making in United Kingdom healthcare.Health research policy and systems · 2020Article
- Use of the GRADE approach in health policymaking and evaluation: a scoping review of nutrition and physical activity policies.Implementation science : IS · 2020Article
- A scoping review of the uses and institutionalisation of knowledge for health policy in low- and middle-income countries.Health research policy and systems · 2020Article
13 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
objectiveThis paper is based on a qualitative study that aimed to identify factors that facilitate or impede evidence-based policy making at a local level in the UK National Health Service (NHS). It considers how models of research utilisation drawn from the social sciences map onto empirical evidence from this study.
designA literature review and case studies of social research projects that were initiated by NHS health authority managers or GP fundholders in one region of the NHS. In depth interviews and document analysis were used.
settingOne NHS region in England.
participantsPolicy makers, GPs and researchers working on each of the social research projects selected as case studies. MAIN
resultsThe direct influence of research evidence on decision making was tempered by factors such as financial constraints, shifting timescales and decision makers' own experiential knowledge. Research was more likely to impact on policy in indirect ways, including shaping policy debate and mediating dialogue between service providers and users.
conclusionsThe study highlights the role of sustained dialogue between researchers and the users of research in improving the utilisation of research-based evidence in the policy process.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.