ArticleHealth research policy and systems2018
Factors affecting engagement between academic faculty and decision-makers: learnings and priorities for a school of public health.
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.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- The role of universities in enhancing interprofessional collaboration during COVID-19 in Lebanon: academia as neutral convener in a public-private twinning initiative-a qualitative case study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- A formative evaluation of the TB Think Tank's role and influence on TB policy in South Africa.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- Closing the gap between implementation science and policy in Nigeria: lessons from the Nigeria implementation science alliance using a nominal group technique.Frontiers in health services · 2025Article
- Adapting to Gen Z: Innovative educational strategies in medical education.Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences · 2024Article
- Developing and planning country-specific integrated knowledge translation strategies: experiences from the GELA project in Malawi, Nigeria, and South Africa.BMC public health · 2024Article
- National strategies for knowledge translation in health policy-making: A scoping review of grey literature.Health research policy and systems · 2024Article
- Characteristics of knowledge translation platforms and methods for evaluating them: a scoping review protocol.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Article
- Integrated knowledge translation to advance noncommunicable disease policy and practice in South Africa: application of the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment (EPIS) framework.Health research policy and systems · 2021Article
- Implementation research approaches to promoting universal health coverage in Africa: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Protocol for a scoping review of implementation research approaches to universal health coverage in Africa.BMJ open · 2021Article
- Exploring the evolution of engagement between academic public health researchers and decision-makers: from initiation to dissolution.Health research policy and systems · 2020Article
- Building a framework for the evaluation of knowledge translation for the Canadian Network for Observational Drug Effect Studies.Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2020Article
- Experience of Health Leadership in Partnering With University-Based Researchers in Canada - A Call to "Re-imagine" Research.International journal of health policy and management · 2019Article
- University Curricula in Evidence-Informed Decision Making and Knowledge Translation: Integrating Best Practice, Innovation, and Experience for Effective Teaching and Learning.Frontiers in public health · 2019Article
- Researcher and policymaker dialogue: the Policy BUDDIES Project in Western Cape Province, South Africa.BMJ global health · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.