Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34625071›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2021

Translating evidence into policy: opinions and insights of Health Researchers and Policymakers in Nepal.

Biplav Babu Tiwari, Anusha Ban, Sony Gurung, Khem Bahadur Karki

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Biplav Babu TiwariMaharajgunj Medical Campus (MMC), Institute of Medicine (IOM), Tribhuvan University (TU), Kathmandu, Nepal. biplavt4@gmail.com.
Anusha BanMaharajgunj Medical Campus (MMC), Institute of Medicine (IOM), Tribhuvan University (TU), Kathmandu, Nepal.
Sony GurungMaharajgunj Medical Campus (MMC), Institute of Medicine (IOM), Tribhuvan University (TU), Kathmandu, Nepal.
Khem Bahadur KarkiMaharajgunj Medical Campus (MMC), Institute of Medicine (IOM), Tribhuvan University (TU), Kathmandu, Nepal.
Tribhuvan University Teaching Hospital · NP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Evidence-Based Policymaking (EBP) process in Nepal is rife with poor practices where often policymakers are portrayed as perpetrators for such practices. However, we need to think of the EBP as a two-sided coin where both research pull and research push play equally significant roles. This study aimed to assess the perception of Nepalese health policymakers and researchers on EBP and identify appropriate mechanisms to integrate evidence into policies.

methodsFollowing the constructivist philosophical paradigm, qualitative research design was used in the study with the grounded theory approach. Purposive sampling was performed, and the 12 in-depth interviews were conducted, where number of interviews was finalized using saturation theory. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, translated to English, coded line by line, and then developed into themes. Thematic analysis technique was used to manually analyze the data.

resultsStudy participants highlighted that evidence is being utilized during policy formulation but not in the amount it should be, with a preference for anecdotal evidence further reducing the chance. Apart from these barriers, poor credibility of information obtained, poorly targeted dissemination, inadequate policy-based researches, and policymakers and researchers operating within the spheres of their own with a feeble link to channel the flow of information between them were identified by participants. On the other hand, the publication of one-pager research brief, conduction of nationally representative surveys especially quantitative studies, the practice of cost-effectiveness study, and policymaker's involvement during the research were some facilitators identified.

conclusionsMoreover, the study accentuates that better communication strategies such as the establishment of formal forums with policymakers and researchers, better-targeted dissemination, and identification of priority areas have wide potential to promote a unified front of health policymakers and researchers for EBP.

Indexed as

Health PolicyPolicy MakingHumansNepalQualitative ResearchResearch PersonnelEvidence-based policyHealth policyNepalQualitative researchResearch-to-policy

Identifiers

PMID34625071
PMCPMC8501615
OpenAlexW3194959313

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.