Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30333925›Full record

ArticleGlobal challenges (Hoboken, NJ)2018

Scientific Advisory Committees at the World Health Organization: A Qualitative Study of How Their Design Affects Quality, Relevance, and Legitimacy.

Unni Gopinathan, Steven J Hoffman, Trygve Ottersen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global challenges (Hoboken, NJ), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Addressing the Need to Select Indicators of Adolescent Health: An Advisory Group's Reflections on the Journey.The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine · 2024
    Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

3 authors.

Unni GopinathanDivision for Health Services Norwegian Institute of Public Health 0473 Oslo Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-7145-1461
Steven J HoffmanGlobal Strategy Lab Dahdaleh Institute for Global Health Research Faculty of Health and Osgoode Hall Law School York University Toronto Ontario M3J 1P3 Canada.
Trygve OttersenDivision for Health Services Norwegian Institute of Public Health 0473 Oslo Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Governments and international organizations frequently convene scientific advisory committees (SACs) to support decision-making with scientific advice. In this study, thematic analysis of interviews with 35 senior WHO staff identified five main themes characterizing WHO's experience with designing SACs to ensure quality, relevance, and legitimacy of scientific advice. First, in addition to technical matters, SACs are established to serve broader strategic objectives, including consensus building to promote high-level political messages. Second, for SACs to be fully independent, they must have autonomy from the institutions convening or funding them, from the institutions from where SAC members are recruited, and from the institutions to whom the advice is directed. Third, since choices affecting quality, relevance, and legitimacy are closely linked, designing SACs often require trade-offs among these three attributes. Fourth, staff supporting SACs need to balance between safeguarding SACs from external influence and being receptive to the external political environment. Fifth, the design of SACs need to balance the involvement of stakeholders with the power to act on recommendations against the need to protect the independence and integrity of the scientific process. Overall, this study highlights key choices conveners of SACs must make when seeking to promote quality, relevance, and legitimacy of scientific advice.

Indexed as

boundary organizationsCRELEevidence‐informed health policyscience–policy interfacescientific advicescientific advisory committeesWorld Health Organization

Identifiers

PMID30333925
PMCPMC6175305

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.