Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40351866›Full record

ArticlePublic health reviews2025

Engaging Scientists in Science Policy: Experiences From Canada.

Steven Lâm, Sarah Raza, Lisa Hansen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Public health reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Steven LâmInternational Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), Nairobi, Kenya.
Sarah RazaPublic Health Agency of Canada (PHAC), Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Lisa HansenPublic Health Agency of Canada (PHAC), Ottawa, ON, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Training scientists in science policy is crucial to enhance scientific advice for decision-making. However, there are limited opportunities for scientists to receive such training. Analysis: We reflected on our participation in a one-year postgraduate science policy fellowship program in Canada. Although recently discontinued in 2023, this fellowship allowed us to refine practical policy skills, contribute to policy outputs that advanced our office's mandate, and access career pathways beyond academia. Policy Options: Recognizing the value of engaging scientists in policy, we advocate for continued offerings of science policy training, alongside rigorous evaluation to inform program changes. Additionally, we encourage increased financial support early on for graduate students to sustain a talent pool of scientists who will become future science policy leaders. Lastly, we urge more scientists and students to be active in science policy spaces. Conclusion: By openly sharing our experiences and learnings from the fellowship, we seek to contribute to ongoing discussions on the importance of science policy training and its role in bridging the gap between science and decision-making.

Indexed as

environmental scanevaluationfellowshippublic healthscience policyscientisttraining

Identifiers

PMID40351866
PMCPMC12061685

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.