Trial reportHealth research policy and systems2019
Increasing the capacity of policy agencies to use research findings: a stepped-wedge trial.
Trial report in Health research policy and systems, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- Lessons learned from descriptions and evaluations of knowledge translation platforms supporting evidence-informed policy-making in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review.Health research policy and systems · 2020Pooled it
- Contexts for Scaling Up Evidence-Based Preventive Interventions: Examining Factors That Influence the Likelihood of the Use of Research Language in Substance Use Legislation.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2026Article
- The use of research evidence in blood collection policy and practice: a qualitative study with frontline staff, middle managers and senior managers.Health research policy and systems · 2025Article
- Operational and organizational variation in determinants of policy implementation success: the case of policies that earmark taxes for behavioral health services.Implementation science : IS · 2024Article
- Building bridges: evaluating policymakers' research capacities, engagement, and utilization in health policymaking within the Kuwaiti context: a cross-sectional study.Health research policy and systems · 2024Article
- The implementation of embedded researchers in policy, public services, and commercial settings: a systematic evidence and gap map.Implementation science communications · 2024Article
- Methods and measures to evaluate the impact of participatory model building on public policymakers: a scoping review protocol.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Article
- A policy implementation study of earmarked taxes for mental health services: study protocol.Implementation science communications · 2023Article
- Inter-agency collaboration is associated with increased frequency of research use in children's mental health policy making.Health services research · 2022Article
- Partisan differences in the effects of economic evidence and local data on legislator engagement with dissemination materials about behavioral health: a dissemination trial.Implementation science : IS · 2022Article
- Embracing policy implementation science to ensure translation of evidence to cancer control policy.Translational behavioral medicine · 2021Article
- Policymakers' Research Capacities, Engagement, and Use of Research in Public Health Policymaking.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Co-production of knowledge: the future.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2021Article
- Determinants of using children's mental health research in policymaking: variation by type of research use and phase of policy process.Implementation science : IS · 2021Article
- Dissemination Strategies to Accelerate the Policy Impact of Children's Mental Health Services Research.Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.) · 2020Article
- How was research engaged with and used in the development of 131 policy documents? Findings and measurement implications from a mixed methods study.Implementation science : IS · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis paper describes the trial of a novel intervention, Supporting Policy In health with evidence from Research: an Intervention Trial (SPIRIT). It examines (1) the feasibility of delivering this kind of programme in practice; (2) its acceptability to participants; (3) the impact of the programme on the capacity of policy agencies to engage with research; and (4) the engagement with and use of research by policy agencies.
methodsSPIRIT was a multifaceted, highly tailored, stepped-wedge, cluster-randomised, trial involving six health policy agencies in Sydney, Australia. Agencies were randomly allocated to one of three start dates to receive the 1-year intervention programme. SPIRIT included audit, feedback and goal setting; a leadership programme; staff training; the opportunity to test systems to facilitate research use in policies; and exchange with researchers. Outcome measures were collected at each agency every 6 months for 30 months.
resultsParticipation in SPIRIT was associated with significant increases in research use capacity at staff and agency levels. Staff reported increased confidence in research use skills, and agency leaders reported more extensive systems and structures in place to support research use. Self-report data suggested there was also an increase in tactical research use among agency staff. Given the relatively small numbers of participating agencies and the complexity of their contexts, findings suggest it is possible to effect change in the way policy agencies approach the use of research. This is supported by the responses on the other trial measures; while these were not statistically significant, on 18 of the 20 different measures used, the changes observed were consistent with the hypothesised intervention effect (that is, positive impacts).
conclusionsAs an early test of an innovative approach, SPIRIT has demonstrated that it is possible to increase research engagement and use in policy agencies. While more work is needed to establish the replicability and generalisability of these findings, this trial suggests that building staff skills and organisational structures may be effective in increasing evidence use.
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.