ReviewSystematic reviews2015
Advancing the field of health systems research synthesis.
Review in Systematic reviews, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Integrated community case management of childhood illness in low- and middle-income countries.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Academic contributions to the development of evidence and policy systems: an EPPI Centre collective autoethnography.Health research policy and systems · 2023Article
- Collaboration on evidence synthesis in Africa: a network study of growing research capacity.Health research policy and systems · 2021Article
- Researching, co-creating and testing innovations in paper-based health information systems (PHISICC) to support health workers' decision-making: protocol of a multi-country, transdisciplinary, mixed-methods research programme in three sub-Saharan countries.Health research policy and systems · 2021Article
- Article
- Rapid response to crisis: Health system lessons from the active period of COVID-19.Health policy and technology · 2020Article
- International experiments with different models of allocating funds to facilitate integrated care: a scoping review protocol.BMJ open · 2018Article
- Article
- Validity and usability testing of a health systems guidance appraisal tool, the AGREE-HS.Health research policy and systems · 2018Article
- Integrated mental health services in China: challenges and planning for the future.Health policy and planning · 2018Review
- Population health intervention research: three important advancements.International journal of public health · 2017Article
- The SPARK Tool to prioritise questions for systematic reviews in health policy and systems research: development and initial validation.Health research policy and systems · 2017Article
- eLearning for health system leadership and management capacity building: a protocol for a systematic review.BMJ open · 2017Article
- Coordinating Between Medical Professions' Tasks to Optimize Sub-Saharan Health Systems: A Response to Recent Commentaries.International journal of health policy and management · 2017Article
- Mapping the use of research to support strategies tackling maternal and child health inequities: evidence from six countries in Africa and Latin America.Health research policy and systems · 2016Article
- The Cambodia Research Consortium: expediting research for malaria elimination with the emergency response to artemisinin resistance framework.Malaria journal · 2016Article
- Quasi-experiments to establish causal effects of HIV care and treatment and to improve the cascade of care.Current opinion in HIV and AIDS · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Those planning, managing and working in health systems worldwide routinely need to make decisions regarding strategies to improve health care and promote equity. Systematic reviews of different kinds can be of great help to these decision-makers, providing actionable evidence at every step in the decision-making process. Although there is growing recognition of the importance of systematic reviews to inform both policy decisions and produce guidance for health systems, a number of important methodological and evidence uptake challenges remain and better coordination of existing initiatives is needed. The Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research, housed within the World Health Organization, convened an Advisory Group on Health Systems Research (HSR) Synthesis to bring together different stakeholders interested in HSR synthesis and its use in decision-making processes. We describe the rationale of the Advisory Group and the six areas of its work and reflects on its role in advancing the field of HSR synthesis. We argue in favour of greater cross-institutional collaborations, as well as capacity strengthening in low- and middle-income countries, to advance the science and practice of health systems research synthesis. We advocate for the integration of quasi-experimental study designs in reviews of effectiveness of health systems intervention and reforms. The Advisory Group also recommends adopting priority-setting approaches for HSR synthesis and increasing the use of findings from systematic reviews in health policy and decision-making.
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.