ArticleBMJ global health2024
Evaluation of a strategic academic-government partnership to advance COVID-19 clinical practice guidelines access and uptake in South Africa.
Article in BMJ global health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Formal and informal science-policy interaction during public health emergencies of international concern: a scoping review.BMC global and public health · 2026Pooled it
- Evaluating the implementation of integrated knowledge translation in a multi-country research consortium in Sub-Saharan Africa - a mixed methods comparative case study.Implementation science : IS · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAcademic-government partnerships are important to advance timely, responsive and relevant evidence for decision-making (policy, guideline, law and regulation) deliberations. Deliberate and strategic integrated knowledge translation (KT) approaches within such partnerships have been shown to facilitate evidence-informed decision-making (EIDM). We used Cochrane's KT Framework to map and analyse COVID-19 response activities instituted by a strategic academic-government partnership to support EIDM during the COVID-19 pandemic in South Africa.
methodsWe used Cochrane's KT Framework to map and analyse COVID-19 response activities instituted by a strategic academic-government partnership to support EIDM during the COVID-19 pandemic in South Africa. The COVID-19 response activities included coproducing rapid therapeutics reviews, engaging stakeholders with review evidence, packaging and disseminating review products, facilitating access to rapid reviews for evidence users and adapting partnership processes for rapid review production.
resultsThis paper highlights the importance of (a) authentic partnerships between evidence producers and users (motivated by context-specific goals, trust and relationships); (b) intentional and systematic stakeholder engagement to promote the rapid exchange of information; (c) using tailored, responsive and relevant KT to promote the uptake of evidence and (d) monitoring and evaluating the implementation of KT to identify lessons learnt and adaptation of KT approaches.
conclusionIn responding to future emergencies, a comprehensive KT strategy, including the expertise of KT practitioners and science communicators to make evidence and guideline recommendations accessible, should be embedded. Additionally, streamlining bureaucratic processes for approving and communicating information; identifying and addressing decision-maker capacity needs; engaging a range of stakeholders and integrating KT in usual decision-making processes, is recommended. Adequate investment by governments is needed for sustaining KT approaches that can enhance EIDM for improving public health outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.