ArticleHealth research policy and systems2019
Fostering access to and use of contextualised knowledge to support health policy-making: lessons from the Policy Information Platform in Nigeria.
Article 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 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review of health communication strategies in Sub-Saharan Africa-2015-2022.Health promotion perspectives · 2023Pooled it
- "You've just got to have it ready for when they're ready" - Australian policymakers' perceptions of living evidence synthesis and its opportunity to support health policy.Health research policy and systems · 2025Article
- Knowledge translation platforms: Broker, intermediary or more? A scoping review of definitions, functions and characteristics.Health research policy and systems · 2025Article
- Systematic review of health promotion policies or regulations with CCAT theory.Journal of public health research · 2023Review
- Barriers and Facilitators to Data Use for Decision Making: The Experience of the African Health Initiative Partnerships in Ethiopia, Ghana, and Mozambique.Global health, science and practice · 2022Article
- 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
- Coordination and Management of COVID-19 in Africa through Health Operations and Technical Expertise Pillar: A Case Study from WHO AFRO One Year into Response.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2022Article
- Healthcare Avoidance before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic among Australian Youth: A Longitudinal Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Improving quality and use of routine health information system data in low- and middle-income countries: A scoping review.PloS one · 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
backgroundContextualising evidence to inform policy-making is increasingly recognised as key to developing and implementing effective health policies. Creating a one-stop shop for evidence is an approach that can facilitate timely access to the best evidence to inform policy decisions. We report outcomes after implementation of the Policy Information Platform (PIP), a pilot one-stop evidence repository in Nigeria designed to alleviate barriers to accessing policy-relevant knowledge.
methodsThis cross-sectional study involved five phases, namely (1) consultation with Nigerian policy-makers to identify priority policy issues, areas of health policy information needs, and challenges and capacity constraints in accessing evidence for policy-making; (2) a stakeholder engagement workshop to formally launch the PIP; (3) extraction of data and other information from scientific articles, policy briefs, evaluation reports, grey literature and health policy documents relevant to policy-making in Nigeria (identified by Google and PubMed searches and by examination of websites of relevant Nigerian government ministries, agencies and parastatals), for use in developing the PIP website; (4) promotion of the PIP in national and state health policy meetings; and (5) evaluation of the PIP using a stakeholder survey questionnaire distributed via email and critical appraisal of the grey literature included in the PIP using the authority, accuracy, coverage, objectivity, date and significance (AACODS) checklist.
resultsPriority policy areas identified by policy-makers were disease control and prevention, population health issues and health administration. Challenges identified by policy-makers were a lack of adequate capacity to access policy-relevant evidence and transform the evidence into policy. Policy-makers suggested using systematic reviews, policy briefs and rapid response mechanisms and involving policy-makers in research as ways of increasing evidence uptake for policy. A total of 126 policy-relevant, peer-reviewed scientific articles, 85 health policy documents and 201 policy-relevant grey literature documents were selected for inclusion in the PIP. Of the 195 individuals contacted via email to evaluate the PIP, 31 (15.9%) provided a response. Respondents noted that the PIP facilitated access to information based on local evidence and context-sensitive data. Barriers identified included lack of knowledge about the PIP and limited capacity of end-users to use the data compiled in the platform.
conclusionAn easily accessible one-stop shop of policy-relevant evidence can considerably improve policy-makers' access to evidence for use in policy-making and practice.
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.