ReviewHealth research policy and systems2016
Evidence for Health II: Overcoming barriers to using evidence in policy and practice.
Review in Health research policy and systems, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 3 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
37 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Challenges of using evidence in managerial decision-making of the primary health care system.BMC health services research · 2024Pooled it
- Evidence-based guidelines for hypofractionated radiation in breast cancer: conclusions of the Catalan expert working group.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2022Pooled it
- Systematic review and policy dialogue to determine challenges in evidence-informed health policy-making: findings of the SASHA study.Health research policy and systems · 2021Pooled it
- Exploring the utility of Preevid, an evidence-based answer service to clinical questions, during the COVID-19 pandemic.Health information and libraries journal · 2025Article
- A scoping review of knowledge translation in strengthening health policy and practice: sources, platforms, tools, opportunities, and challenges.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025Article
- Use of evidence to inform regional primary health care planning in Australia.Health research policy and systems · 2025Article
- Epidemiological methods in transition: Minimizing biases in classical and digital approaches.PLOS digital health · 2025Review
- Innovations for building implementation science capacity among researchers and policymakers: The Depth and Diffusion Model.Global implementation research and applications · 2024Article
- Inconsistent decision making in dental caries diagnosis and treatment: A case-based questionnaire survey.Health science reports · 2024Article
- Stakeholder perspectives from 15 countries in Africa on barriers in snakebite envenoming research and the potential role of research hubs.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2023Article
- The Use of Research for Health Systems Policy Development and Implementation in Mozambique: A Descriptive Study.Global health, science and practice · 2022Review
- The experience of a regional network of health policy and systems actors in translating evidence into policy and action in West Africa.Ghana medical journal · 2022Article
- Behavioral Determinants of Routine Health Information System Data Use in Senegal: A Qualitative Inquiry Based on the Integrated Behavioral Model.Global health, science and practice · 2022Article
- Key Factors Influencing Use of Immunization Cost Evidence in Country Planning and Budgeting Processes: Experiences From Indonesia, Tanzania, and Vietnam.Global health, science and practice · 2022Article
- Policymakers' Research Capacities, Engagement, and Use of Research in Public Health Policymaking.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Key informant perspectives on the challenges and opportunities for using routine health data for decision-making in Senegal.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Risk factors of post-traumatic stress disorder 10 years after Wenchuan earthquake: a population-based case-control study.Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences · 2021Article
- Strengthening health policy development and management systems in low- and middle- income countries: South Africa's approach.Health policy OPEN · 2020Article
- Advancing methodology for scoping reviews: recommendations arising from a scoping literature review (SLR) to inform transformation of Children and Adolescent Mental Health Services.BMC medical research methodology · 2020Article
- Health system decision-makers at the helm of implementation research: development of a framework to evaluate the processes and effectiveness of embedded approaches.Health research policy and systems · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Even the highest quality evidence will have little impact unless it is incorporated into decision-making for health. It is therefore critical to overcome the many barriers to using evidence in decision-making, including (1) missing the window of opportunity, (2) knowledge gaps and uncertainty, (3) controversy, irrelevant and conflicting evidence, as well as (4) vested interests and conflicts of interest. While this is certainly not a comprehensive list, it covers a number of main themes discussed in the knowledge translation literature on this topic, and better understanding these barriers can help readers of the evidence to be more savvy knowledge users and help researchers overcome challenges to getting their evidence into practice. Thus, the first step in being able to use research evidence for improving population health is ensuring that the evidence is available at the right time and in the right format and language so that knowledge users can take the evidence into consideration alongside a multitude of other factors that also influence decision-making. The sheer volume of scientific publications makes it difficult to find the evidence that can actually help inform decisions for health. Policymakers, especially in low- and middle-income countries, require context-specific evidence to ensure local relevance. Knowledge synthesis and dissemination of policy-relevant local evidence is important, but it is still not enough. There are times when the interpretation of the evidence leads to various controversies and disagreements, which act as barriers to the uptake of evidence. Research evidence can also be influenced and misused for various aims and agendas. It is therefore important to ensure that any new evidence comes from reliable sources and is interpreted in light of the overall body of scientific literature. It is not enough to simply produce evidence, nor even to synthesize and package evidence into a more user-friendly format. Particularly at the policy level, political savvy is also needed to ensure that vested interests do not undermine decisions that can impact the health of individuals and populations.
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.