Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37264415›Full record

ReviewHealth research policy and systems2023

Evidence synthesis to policy: development and implementation of an impact-oriented approach from the Eastern Mediterranean Region.

Fadi El-Jardali, Racha Fadlallah, Lama Bou Karroum, Elie A Akl

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

4 authors.

Fadi El-JardaliDepartment of Health Management and Policy, Faculty of Health Sciences, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.
Racha FadlallahDepartment of Health Management and Policy, Faculty of Health Sciences, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.
Lama Bou KarroumDepartment of Health Management and Policy, Faculty of Health Sciences, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.
Elie A AklCenter for Systematic Reviews On Health Policy and Systems Research (SPARK), American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon. ea32@aub.edu.lb.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3444-8618

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite the importance of evidence syntheses in informing policymaking, their production and use remain limited in the Eastern Mediterranean region (EMR). There is a lack of empirical research on approaches to promote and use policy-relevant evidence syntheses to inform policymaking processes in the EMR.

objectiveThis study sought to describe the development of an impact-oriented approach to link evidence synthesis to policy, and its implementation through selected case studies in Lebanon, a middle-income country in the EMR.

methodsThis study followed a multifaceted and iterative process that included (i) a review of the literature, (ii) input from international experts in evidence synthesis and evidence-informed health policymaking, and (iii) application in a real-world setting (implementation). We describe four selected case studies of implementation. Surveys were used to assess policy briefs, deliberative dialogues, and post-dialogue activities. Additionally, Kingdon's stream theory was adopted to further explain how and why the selected policy issues rose to the decision agenda.

resultsThe approach incorporates three interrelated phases: (1) priority setting, (2) evidence synthesis, and (3) uptake. Policy-relevant priorities are generated through formal priority setting exercises, direct requests by policymakers and stakeholders, or a focusing event. Identified priorities are translated into focused questions that can be addressed via evidence synthesis (phase 1). Next, a scoping of the literature is conducted to identify existing evidence syntheses addressing the question of interest. Unless the team identifies relevant, up-to-date and high-quality evidence syntheses, it proceeds to conducting SRs addressing the priority questions of interest (phase 2). Next, the team prepares knowledge translation products (e.g., policy briefs) for undertaking knowledge uptake activities, followed by monitoring and evaluation (phase 3). There are two prerequisites to the application of the approach: enhancing contextual awareness and capacity strengthening. The four case studies illustrate how evidence produced from the suites of activities was used to inform health policies and practices.

conclusionsTo our knowledge, this is the first study to describe both the development and implementation of an approach to link evidence synthesis to policy in the EMR. We believe the approach will be useful for researchers, knowledge translation platforms, governments, and funders seeking to promote evidence-informed policymaking and practice.

Indexed as

Health PolicyPolicy MakingHumansMediterranean RegionQualitative ResearchSurveys and QuestionnairesApproachEastern Mediterranean RegionEvidence synthesisEvidence-to-policyImpactKnowledge translationLebanonPolicy-relevantSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID37264415
PMCPMC10234246

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.