Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33331825›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2020

Perspectives and Experiences of Policy Makers, Researchers, Health Information Technology Professionals, and the Public on Evidence-Based Health Policies: Protocol for a Qualitative Study.

Anastasia Mallidou, Dzifa Dordunoo, Elizabeth Borycki, Andre Kushniruk, Kirsten Sadeghi-Yekta, Julie Fraser, Sirisha Asuri

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Process for Rapid Co-development of a Decision Aid Prototype for Population-wide Cancer Screening.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2025
    Article
  2. 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

7 authors.

Anastasia Mallidou *School of Nursing, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6094-567X
Dzifa DordunooSchool of Nursing, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0290-8261
Elizabeth BoryckiSchool of Health Information Science, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0928-8867
Andre KushnirukSchool of Health Information Science, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2557-9288
Kirsten Sadeghi-YektaTheatre Department, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1161-465X
Julie FraserProfessional Regulatory Practice Department, Fraser Health, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0492-3067
Sirisha AsuriPrimary Care Division, BC Ministry of Health, Victoria, BC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1339-0856

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvidence-based health policy (EBHP) development is critical to the judicious use of public funds. EBHPs increase transparency, accountability, effectiveness, and efficiency of policies. Encouraging collaboration between researchers or knowledge producers and policy makers is important because both communities have distinct professional cultures, resulting in them working separately without understanding each other. Knowledge sharing is a complex process that requires understanding of cultural aspects that may reduce cultural differences and increase the use of common language. Health information technology (HIT) is a useful tool to increase knowledge translation, which may result in the transparent use of evidence and networking in developing EBHPs. Our vision is to leverage HIT tools for a better health system that includes digitalized, open source, evidence-based, and transparent ways for collaboration and development of robust mechanisms and for sharing of synthesized evidence with knowledge user-friendly forms.

objectiveThe aim of this study is to develop a conceptual framework on Knowledge translation and health Information Technology for Transparency (KhITT) in policy making and EBHPs (ie, the KhITT framework). The framework will be informed by the views of four key stakeholder groups (ie, policy makers, knowledge producers, HIT professionals, and the public) toward EBHP. The informants may also describe practices that demonstrate the EBHP development process and suggest technology platforms to enable this process.

methodsWe propose an exploratory, descriptive qualitative study to take place in British Columbia, Canada, using in-depth semistructured interviews. To ensure data saturation and trustworthiness, we will use a nonprobability, purposive snowball sample of up to 15 eligible participants in each of the four stakeholder groups. We will analyze the data using content analysis.

resultsThe KhITT framework focuses on various stakeholders' perspectives to better understand their perceived needs and priorities in identifying issues with EBHP, in order to make informed recommendations. Ethics approval has been obtained by the harmonized Behavioural Research Ethics Board at the University of British Columbia. We anticipate that we will complete data collection and analysis by December 2020. Preliminary results will be published in summer 2021.

conclusionsOur ultimate goal of this study is to develop a conceptual framework and describe the technology platforms that would enable the EBHP process. We anticipate that our rigorous content analysis will be able to produce insights and themes that are able to address our objectives, contribute to an in-depth understanding of the EBHP process within British Columbia, highlight all influential factors, explicitly disseminate and communicate the study results, identify issues with EBHP and provide informed recommendations to address them, and enhance efforts toward transparent EBHPs. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/16268.

Indexed as

evidence-based health policyhealth information technologyknowledge producersknowledge translationpolicy makersresearcherstransparency

Identifiers

PMID33331825
PMCPMC7775201

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.