Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36647155›Full record

ArticleHealth research policy and systems2023

Output-orientated policy engagement: a model for advancing the use of epidemiological evidence in health policy.

Emily Banks, Abby Haynes, Ray Lovett, Uday Narayan Yadav, Jason Agostino

Open access · goldAbstract readLetter
In one paragraph

Article in Health research policy and systems, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Emily BanksNational Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia. emily.banks@anu.edu.au.
Abby HaynesInstitute for Musculoskeletal Health, The University of Sydney and Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5703-5683
Ray LovettNational Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
Uday Narayan YadavNational Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
Jason AgostinoSchool of Medicine and Psychology, ANU, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
Australian National University · AUThe University of Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUse of epidemiological research in policy and practice is suboptimal, contributing to significant preventable morbidity and mortality. Barriers to the use of research evidence in policy include lack of research-policy engagement, lack of policy-relevant research, differences in policymaker and researcher practice norms, time constraints, difficulties in coordination, and divergent languages and reward systems. APPROACH AND OUTCOMES: In order to increase policy-relevant research and research uptake, we developed the output-orientated policy engagement (OOPE) model, in Australia. It integrates a foundational approach to engagement with cycles of specific activity focused around selected research outputs. Foundational elements include measures to increase recognition and valuing of policymaker expertise, emphasis on policy uptake, policy awareness of the research group's work, regular policy engagement and policy-relevant capacity-building. Specific activities include (i) identification of an "output"-usually at draft stage-and program of work which are likely to be of interest to policymakers; (ii) initial engagement focusing on sharing "preview" evidence from this output, with an invitation to provide input into this and to advise on the broader program of work; and (iii) if there is sufficient interest, formation of a researcher-policy-maker partnership to shape and release the output, as well as inform the program of work. This cycle is repeated as the relationship continues and is deepened. As well as supporting policy-informed evidence generation and research-aware policymakers, the output-orientated model has been found to be beneficial in fostering the following: a pragmatic starting place for researchers, in often large and complex policy environments; purposeful and specific engagement, encouraging shared expectations; non-transactional engagement around common evidence needs, whereby researchers are not meeting with policymakers with the expectation of receiving funding; built-in translation; time and resource efficiency; relationship-building; mutual learning; policy-invested researchers and research-invested policy-makers; and tangible policy impacts. A case study outlines how the output-orientated approach supported researcher-policymaker collaboration to generate new evidence regarding Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cardiovascular disease risk and to apply this to national guidelines.

conclusionOutput-orientated policy engagement provides a potentially useful pragmatic model to catalyse and support partnerships between researchers and policymakers, to increase the policy-relevance and application of epidemiological evidence.

Indexed as

Health PolicyAustraliaAustralian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander PeoplesHumansEpidemiologyHealth policyOutput-orientated policy engagementResearch impactResearch translation

Identifiers

PMID36647155
PMCPMC9843894
OpenAlexW4316499823

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.