ReviewJournal of epidemiology and community health2005
Can scientists and policy makers work together?
Review in Journal of epidemiology and community health, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 123 papers, 4 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
123 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Priority Given to Technology in Government-Based Mental Health and Addictions Vision and Strategy Documents: Systematic Policy Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Pooled it
- Using narratives to impact health policy-making: a systematic review.Health research policy and systems · 2019Pooled it
- Pediatric eMental healthcare technologies: a systematic review of implementation foci in research studies, and government and organizational documents.Implementation science : IS · 2017Pooled it
- Knowledge transfer and exchange: review and synthesis of the literature.The Milbank quarterly · 2007Pooled it
- Cultivating researcher-policymaker partnerships: A randomized controlled trial of a model for training public psychologists.The American psychologist · 2021Trial
- Increasing the capacity of policy agencies to use research findings: a stepped-wedge trial.Health research policy and systems · 2019Trial
- Strengthening School Safety Through Governmental Research-Practice Partnerships: the Arizona School Safety Program.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2026Article
- Introducing family medicine in Tanzania: strengthening primary health care through the 5 Cs-advocacy through a deliberative dialogue symposium-a case study of multinational academic collaboration.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- A contemporary approach to developing health policies: the Dubai Health Authority as a case study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Global Healthy and Sustainable City Indicators: Collaborative development of an open science toolkit for calculating and reporting on urban indicators internationally.Environment and planning. B, urban analytics and city science · 2025Article
- Article
- A multi-stage approach to support timely health policy decisions during crisis: the fast-track Delphi.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Shifting the paradigm of research-to-policy impact: Infrastructure for improving researcher engagement and collective action.Development and psychopathology · 2024Article
- Ethics of Mathematical Modeling in Public Health: The Case of Medical Male Circumcision for HIV Prevention in Africa.Public health ethics · 2024Article
- How to leverage implementation research for equity in global health.Global health research and policy · 2024Article
- Innovations for building implementation science capacity among researchers and policymakers: The Depth and Diffusion Model.Global implementation research and applications · 2024Article
- A model of faulty and faultless disagreement for post-hoc assessments of knowledge utilization in evidence-based policymaking.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Scenario design for infectious disease projections: Integrating concepts from decision analysis and experimental design.Epidemics · 2024Article
- Article
- From Chaos to Rationality: A Contingent Meta-Model for Evidence-Informed Health Policymaking in Diverse Contexts.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2024Article
63 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper addresses a fundamental question in evidence based policy making--can scientists and policy makers work together? It first provides a scenario outlining the different mentalities and imperatives of scientists and policy makers, and then discusses various issues and solutions relating to whether and how scientists and policy makers can work together. Scientists and policy makers have different goals, attitudes toward information, languages, perception of time, and career paths. Important issues affecting their working together include lack of mutual trust and respect, different views on the production and use of evidence, different accountabilities, and whether there should be a link between science and policy. The suggested solutions include providing new incentives to encourage scientists and policy makers to work together, using knowledge brokers (translational scientists), making organisational changes, defining research in a broader sense, re-defining the starting point for knowledge transfer, expanding the accountability horizon, and finally, acknowledging the complexity of policy making. It is hoped that further discussion and debate on the partnership idea, the need for incentives, recognising the incompatibility problems, the role of civil society, and other related themes will lead to new opportunities for further advancing evidence based policy and practice.
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.