Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26516149›Full record

ArticleHealth policy and planning2015

Evidence-informed policymaking in practice: country-level examples of use of evidence for iCCM policy.

Daniela C Rodríguez, Jessica Shearer, Alda R E Mariano, Pamela A Juma, Sarah L Dalglish, Sara Bennett

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health policy and planning, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Daniela C RodríguezJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Dept. of International Health, 615 N Wolfe Street, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA, drodri17@jhu.edu.
Jessica ShearerJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Dept. of International Health, 615 N Wolfe Street, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA.
Alda R E MarianoUniversidade Eduardo Mondlane, Community Health Department, Maputo, Mozambique and.
Pamela A JumaAfrican Population and Health Research Center, Nairobi, Kenya.
Sarah L DalglishJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Dept. of International Health, 615 N Wolfe Street, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA.
Sara BennettJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Dept. of International Health, 615 N Wolfe Street, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Integrated Community Case Management of Childhood Illness (iCCM) is a policy for providing treatment for malaria, diarrhoea and pneumonia for children below 5 years at the community level, which is generating increasing evidence and support at the global level. As countries move to adopt iCCM, it becomes important to understand how this growing evidence base is viewed and used by national stakeholders. This article explores whether, how and why evidence influenced policy formulation for iCCM in Niger, Kenya and Mozambique, and uses Carol Weiss' models of research utilization to further explain the use of evidence in these contexts. A documentary review and in-depth stakeholder interviews were conducted as part of retrospective case studies in each study country. Findings indicate that all three countries used national monitoring data to identify the issue of children dying in the community prior to reaching health facilities, whereas international research evidence was used to identify policy options. Nevertheless, policymakers greatly valued local evidence and pilot projects proved critical in advancing iCCM. World Health Organization and United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) functioned as knowledge brokers, bringing research evidence and experiences from other countries to the attention of local policymakers as well as sponsoring site visits and meetings. In terms of country-specific findings, Niger demonstrated both Interactive and Political models of research utilization by using iCCM to capitalize on the existing health infrastructure. Both Mozambique and Kenya exhibit Problem-Solving research utilization with different outcomes. Furthermore, the persistent quest for additional evidence suggests a Tactical use of research in Kenya. Results presented here indicate that while evidence from research studies and other contexts can be critical to policy development, local evidence is often needed to answer key policymaker questions. In the end, evidence may not be enough to overcome resistance if the policy is viewed as incompatible with national goals.

Indexed as

Case ManagementChild HealthChild Health ServicesEvidence-Based PracticePolicy MakingAfricaChildHumansInterviews as TopicQualitative ResearchCase managementchild healthevidence-based policyKenyaMozambiqueNigerpolicy analysissub-Saharan Africa

Identifiers

PMID26516149
PMCPMC4625759

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.