Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30045730›Full record

ArticleHealth research policy and systems2018

Factors affecting engagement between academic faculty and decision-makers: learnings and priorities for a school of public health.

Nasreen S Jessani, Sameer M Siddiqi, Carly Babcock, Melissa Davey-Rothwell, Shirley Ho, David R Holtgrave

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health research policy and systems, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Adapting to Gen Z: Innovative educational strategies in medical education.Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
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.

Nasreen S JessaniJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 624 North Broadway, Baltimore, MD, 21205, United States of America. njessani@jhu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1160-3099
Sameer M SiddiqiJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 624 North Broadway, Baltimore, MD, 21205, United States of America.
Carly BabcockJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 624 North Broadway, Baltimore, MD, 21205, United States of America.
Melissa Davey-RothwellJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 624 North Broadway, Baltimore, MD, 21205, United States of America.
Shirley HoJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 624 North Broadway, Baltimore, MD, 21205, United States of America.
David R HoltgraveJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 624 North Broadway, Baltimore, MD, 21205, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSchools of public health (SPHs) are increasingly being recognised as important contributors of human, social and intellectual capital relevant to health policy and decision-making. Few studies within the implementation science literature have systematically examined knowledge exchange experiences within this specific organisational context. The purpose of this study was therefore to elicit whether documented facilitators and barriers to engaging with government decision-makers resonates within an academic SPH context. We sought to understand the variations in such experiences at four different levels of government decision-making. Furthermore, we sought to elicit intervention priorities as identified by faculty.

methodsBetween May and December 2016, 211 (34%) of 627 eligible full-time faculty across one SPH in the United States of America participated in a survey on engagement with decision-makers at the city, state, federal and global government levels. Surveys were administered face-to-face or via Skype. Descriptive data as well as tests of association and logistic regression analyses were conducted using STATA.

resultsOver three-quarters of respondents identified colleagues with ties to decision-makers, institutional affiliation and conducting policy-relevant research as the highest facilitators. Several identified time constraints, academic incentives and financial support as important contributors to engagement. Faculty characteristics, such as research areas of expertise, career track and faculty rank, were found to be statistically significantly associated with facilitators. The top three intervention priorities that emerged were (1) creating incentives for engagement, (2) providing funding for engagement and (3) inculcating an institutional culture around engagement.

conclusionsThe data suggest that five principal categories of factors - individual characteristics, institutional environment, relational dynamics, research focus and funder policies - affect the willingness and ability of academic faculty to engage with government decision-makers. This study suggests that SPHs could enhance the relevance of their role in health policy decision-making by (1) periodically measuring engagement with decision-makers; (2) enhancing individual capacity in knowledge translation and communication, taking faculty characteristics into account; (3) institutionalising a culture that supports policies and practices for engagement in decision-making processes; and (4) creating a strategy to expand and nurture trusted, relevant networks and relationships with decision-makers.

Indexed as

Administrative PersonnelAttitudeFaculty, MedicalHealth PolicyHealth Services ResearchInterdisciplinary CommunicationSchools, Public HealthDecision MakingEvidence-Based MedicineFinancing, OrganizedGovernmentHealth PrioritiesHumansInterpersonal RelationsLearningMotivationDisseminationEvidence-informed decision-makingKnowledge exchangeKnowledge translationSchool of public health

Identifiers

PMID30045730
PMCPMC6060478

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.