ArticleHealth research policy and systems2019
How are evidence generation partnerships between researchers and policy-makers enacted in practice? A qualitative interview study.
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 20 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
20 citing papers in PubMed.
- Facilitating collaboration between public health researchers and policymakers: a scoping review of global practices, barriers and facilitators.Health research policy and systems · 2026Review
- Enablers and barriers for policymaker engagement in health research from the perspective of policymakers: a scoping review.BMJ open · 2025Article
- How does integrated knowledge translation work? A realist review.Health research policy and systems · 2025Review
- Early Roots of Childhood Obesity: Risk Factors, Mechanisms, and Prevention Strategies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- How governments influence public health research: a scoping review.Health promotion international · 2025Article
- Identifying factors for promoting evidence-based policymaking in Japan with the perspective of policymakers, researchers and knowledge brokers: a semistructured interview.Health research policy and systems · 2025Article
- Innovations for building implementation science capacity among researchers and policymakers: The Depth and Diffusion Model.Global implementation research and applications · 2024Article
- Power imbalances and equity in the day-to-day functioning of a north plus multi-south higher education institutions partnership: a case study.International journal for equity in health · 2024Article
- Applying behaviour change models to policy-making: development and validation of the Policymakers' Information Use Questionnaire (POLIQ).Health research policy and systems · 2023Article
- "We're Not Providing the Best Care If We Are Not on the Cutting Edge of Research": A Research Impact Evaluation at a Regional Australian Hospital and Health Service.International journal of health policy and management · 2022Article
- A Qualitative Exploration of the Views of Policymakers and Policy Advisors on the Impact of Mental Health Stigma on the Development and Implementation of Mental Health Policy in Singapore.Administration and policy in mental health · 2022Article
- Strategies to promote evidence use for health programme improvement: learning from the experiences of embedded implementation research teams in Latin America and the Caribbean.Health research policy and systems · 2022Article
- "Not Just a Journal Club - It's Where the Magic Happens": Knowledge Mobilization through Co-Production for Health System Development in the Western Cape Province, South Africa.International journal of health policy and management · 2022Article
- Purpose Formulation, Coalition Building, and Evidence Use in Public-Academic Partnerships: Web-Based Survey Study.JMIR human factors · 2022Article
- Closing the Virtual Gap in Health Care: A Series of Case Studies Illustrating the Impact of Embedding Evaluation Alongside System Initiatives.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- Perspectives and Experiences of Policy Makers, Researchers, Health Information Technology Professionals, and the Public on Evidence-Based Health Policies: Protocol for a Qualitative Study.JMIR research protocols · 2020Article
- Applying systems thinking to knowledge mobilisation in public health.Health research policy and systems · 2020Article
- How does embedded implementation research work? Examining core features through qualitative case studies in Latin America and the Caribbean.Health policy and planning · 2020Article
- A framework for distributed health professions training: using participatory action research to build consensus.BMC medical education · 2020Article
- A scoping review of the uses and institutionalisation of knowledge for health policy in low- and middle-income countries.Health research policy and systems · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEvidence generation partnerships between researchers and policy-makers are a potential method for producing more relevant research with greater potential to impact on policy and practice. Little is known about how such partnerships are enacted in practice, however, or how to increase their effectiveness. We aimed to determine why researchers and policy-makers choose to work together, how they work together, which partnership models are most common, and what the key (1) relationship-based and (2) practical components of successful research partnerships are.
methodsSemi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 18 key informants largely based in New South Wales, Australia, who were (1) researchers experienced in working in partnership with policy in health or health-related areas or (2) policy and programme developers and health system decision-makers experienced in working in partnership with researchers. Data was analysed thematically by two researchers.
resultsResearcher-initiated and policy agency-initiated evidence generation partnerships were common. While policy-initiated partnerships were thought to be the most likely to result in impact, researcher-initiated projects were considered important in advancing the science and were favoured by researchers due to greater perceived opportunities to achieve key academic career metrics. Participants acknowledged that levels of collaboration varied widely in research/policy partnerships from minimal to co-production. Co-production was considered a worthy goal by all, conferring a range of benefits, but one that was difficult to achieve in practice. Some participants asserted that the increased time and resources required for effective co-production meant it was best suited to evaluation and implementation projects where the tacit, experiential knowledge of policy-makers provided critical nuance to underpin study design, implementation and analysis. Partnerships that were mutually considered to have produced the desired outcomes were seen to be underpinned by a range of both relationship-based (such as shared aims and goals and trust) and practical factors (such as sound governance and processes).
conclusionsOur findings highlight the important role of policy-makers in New South Wales in ensuring the relevance of research. There is still much to understand about how to initiate and sustain successful research/policy partnerships, particularly at the highly collaborative end.
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.