Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31878976›Full record

ArticleHealth research policy and systems2019

Utilisation of evidence from Thailand's National Health Examination Survey in policy development: finding the weakest link.

Sripen Tantivess, Jomkwan Yothasamut, Wilailak Saengsri

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sripen TantivessDepartment of Health, Ministry of Public Health, Health Intervention and Technology Assessment Program, 6th Floor, 6th Building, Nonthaburi, 11000, Thailand.
Jomkwan YothasamutDepartment of Health, Ministry of Public Health, Health Intervention and Technology Assessment Program, 6th Floor, 6th Building, Nonthaburi, 11000, Thailand. jomkwan.y@hitap.net.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6101-1756
Wilailak SaengsriDepartment of Health, Ministry of Public Health, Health Intervention and Technology Assessment Program, 6th Floor, 6th Building, Nonthaburi, 11000, Thailand.
Ministry of Public Health · TH

Funding

Thai Health Promotion Foundation 1-3-105-2559
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth surveillance and survey data are helpful in evidence-informed policy decisions. This study is part of an evaluation of the National Health Examination Survey (NHES) programme in Thailand. This paper focuses on the obstacles in the translation of survey information into policies at a national level.

methodsIn-depth interviews with relevant individuals and representatives of institutes were carried out for the data collection. A total of 26 focal informants included executives and staff of NHES funders, government health agencies, civil society organisations, health experts, NHES programme managers and researchers in the survey network.

resultsUtilisation of NHES data in policy-making is limited for many reasons. Despite the potential users' positive views on the technical integrity of experts and practitioners involved in the NHES, the strength of employing health examinations in the data collection is not well recognised. Meanwhile, alternative health surveillance platforms that offer similar information on a shorter timescale are preferable in policy monitoring and evaluation. In sum, the lack of governance of Thailand's health surveillance system is identified as a key element hindering the translation of health surveys, including the NHES, into policies.

conclusionDespite an adequate capacity to conduct population health surveys, the lack of governance structure and function has resulted in a fragmented health monitoring system. Large and small survey projects are conducted and funded by different institutes without common policy direction and alignment mechanisms for prioritising survey topics, collective planning and capacity-building programmes for survey practitioners and users. Lessons drawn from Thailand's NHES can be helpful for policy-makers in other low- and middle-income countries, as effective governance for evidence generation and utilisation is necessary in all contexts, regardless of income level and available resources.

Indexed as

Policy MakingData CollectionGovernment ProgramsHealth PolicyHealth SurveysHumansInterviews as TopicPopulation SurveillanceProgram EvaluationThailandevidence utilisationNational Health Examination Surveypolicy developmentThailand

Identifiers

PMID31878976
PMCPMC6933722
OpenAlexW2998289222

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.