The Cochrane Library was excluded of the VHL by Wiley´s decision on non-renewal of the license for access with BIREME. See more.
EVIPNet > Search > support >

Search history  ()

Results  1-15 de 75
Send result
add to your list
1.

SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP): introduction

Fretheim, A; Lewin, S; Lavis, JN; Oxman, AD
EVIPNet Repository | Language(s): English
Source: Health Research Policy and Systems. 2
Knowing how to find and use research evidence can help policymakers and those who support them to do their jobs better and more efficiently. Each article in this series presents a proposed tool that can be used by those involved in finding and using research evidence to support evidenceinformed health policymaking. The series addresses four broad areas: 1. Supporting evidenceinformed policymaking 2. Identifying needs for research evidence in relation to three steps in policymaking processes, namely problem clarification, options framing, and implementation planning 3. Finding and assessing both systematic reviews and other types of evidence to inform these steps, and 4. Going from research evidence to decisions.
add to your list
2.

SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 1: what is evidence-informed policymaking?

Fretheim, A; Lavis, JN; Oxman, AD; Lewin, S
EVIPNet Repository | Language(s): English
Source: Health Research Policy and Systems. 2
This article is part of a series written for people responsible for making decisions about health policies and programmes and for those who support these decision makers. In this article, we discuss the following three questions: What is evidence? What is the role of research evidence in informing health policy decisions? What is evidence-informed policymaking? Evidence-informed health policymaking is an approach to policy decisions that aims to ensure that decision making is well-informed by the best available research evidence. It is characterised by the systematic and transparent access to, and appraisal of, evidence as an input into the policymaking process.
add to your list
3.

SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 8: deciding how much confidence to place in a systematic review

Lewin, S; Fretheim, A; Oxman, AD; Lavis, JN
EVIPNet Repository | Language(s): English
Source: Health Research Policy and Systems. 2
This article is part of a series written for people responsible for making decisions about health policies and programmes and for those who support these decision makers. The reliability of systematic reviews of the effects of health interventions is variable. Consequently, policymakers and others need to assess how much confidence can be placed in such evidence. The use of systematic and transparent processes to determine such decisions can help to prevent the introduction of errors and bias in these judgements. In this article, we suggest five questions that can be considered when deciding how much confidence to place in the findings of a systematic review of the effects of an intervention.
add to your list
4.

SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 10: taking equity into consideration when assessing the findings of a systematic review

Lavis, JN; Oxman, AD; Fretheim, A; Lewin, S
EVIPNet Repository | Language(s): English
Source: Health Research Policy and Systems. 2
This article is part of a series written for people responsible for making decisions about health policies and programmes and for those who support these decision makers. In this article we address considerations of equity. Inequities can be defined as "differences in health which are not only unnecessary and avoidable but, in addition, are considered unfair and unjust". These have been well documented in relation to social and economic factors. Policies or programmes that are effective can improve the overall health of a population. However, the impact of such policies and programmes on inequities may vary: they may have no impact on inequities, they may reduce inequities, or they may exacerbate them, regardless of their overall effects on population health.
add to your list
5.

STP: Herramientas SUPPORT para la toma de decisiones en políticas de salud informada por la evidencia. 1: qué es la toma de decisiones en políticas informada por la evidencia

Oxman, Andrew D; Lavis, John N; Lewin, Simon; Fretheim, Atle
EVIPNet Repository | Language(s): Spanish
Source: Health Research Policy and Systems. 2
En este artículo discutimos las tres preguntas siguientes: ¿Qué es la evidencia? ¿Cuál es el rol de la evidencia de la investigación en el respaldo de las decisiones en políticas de salud? ¿Qué es la toma de decisiones en políticas informada por la evidencia?
add to your list
6.

SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP). 2: improving how your organisation supports the use of research evidence to inform policymaking

Oxman, AD; Lewin, S; Fretheim, A; Lavis, JN; Vandvik, PO
EVIPNet Repository | Language(s): English
Source: Health Research Policy and Systems. 2
This article is part of a series written for people responsible for making decisions about health policies and programmes and for those who support these decision makers. In this article, we address ways of organising efforts to support evidence-informed health policymaking. Efforts to link research to action may include a range of activities related to the production of research that is both highly relevant to ? and appropriately synthesised for ? policymakers. Such activities may include a mix of efforts used to link research to action, as well as the evaluation of such efforts. Little is known about how best to organise the range of activity options available and, until recently, there have been relatively few organisations responsible for supporting the use of resea (more)
add to your list
7.

SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP). 3: setting priorities for supporting evidence-informed policymaking

Lavis, John N; Lewin, Simon; Fretheim, Atle; Oxman, Andrew D
EVIPNet Repository | Language(s): English
Source: Health Research Policy and Systems. 2
This article is part of a series written for people responsible for making decisions about health policies and programmes and for those who support these decision makers. Policymakers have limited resources for developing ? or supporting the development of ? evidence-informed policies and programmes. These required resources include staff time, staff infrastructural needs (such as access to a librarian or journal article purchasing), and ongoing professional development. They may therefore prefer instead to contract out such work to independent units with more suitably skilled staff and appropriate infrastructure. However, policymakers may only have limited financial resources to do so. Regardless of whether the support for evidence-informed policymaking is provided in-house or contracted out, or whether it is centralised or decentralised, resources always need to be used wisely in order to maximise their impact.
add to your list
8.

SUPPORT Tools for Evidence-informed Policymaking in health 6: using research evidence to address how an option will be implemented

Fretheim, Atle; Oxman, Andrew D; Lewin, Simon; Munabi-Babigumira, Susan; Lavis, John N
EVIPNet Repository | Language(s): English
Source: Health Research Policy and Systems. 2
This article is part of a series written for people responsible for making decisions about health policies and programmes and for those who support these decision makers. After a policy decision has been made, the next key challenge is transforming this stated policy position into practical actions. What strategies, for instance, are available to facilitate effective implementation, and what is known about the effectiveness of such strategies? We suggest five questions that can be considered by policymakers when implementing a health policy or programme.
add to your list
9.

SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed Policymaking in health 11: finding and using evidence about local conditions

Lewin, S; Oxman, AD; García Martí, S; Lavis, JN; Fretheim, A; Munabi-Babigumira, S
EVIPNet Repository | Language(s): English
Source: Health Research Policy and Systems. 2
This article is part of a series written for people responsible for making decisions about health policies and programmes and for those who support these decision makers. Evidence about local conditions is evidence that is available from the specific setting(s) in which a decision or action on a policy or programme option will be taken. Such evidence is always needed, together with other forms of evidence, in order to inform decisions about options. Global evidence is the best starting point for judgements about effects, factors that modify those effects, and insights into ways to approach and address problems.
add to your list
10.

SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 14: organising and using policy dialogues to support evidence-informed policymaking

Oxman, AD; Boyko, J; Lavis, JN; Lewin, S; Fretheim, A
EVIPNet Repository | Language(s): English
Source: Health Research Policy and Systems. 2
Policy dialogues allow research evidence to be considered together with the views, experiences and tacit knowledge of those who will be involved in, or affected by, future decisions about a highpriority issue. Increasing interest in the use of policy dialogues has been fuelled by a number of factors: 1. The recognition of the need for locally contextualised 'decision support' for policymakers and other stakeholders 2. The recognition that research evidence is only one input into the decision-making processes of policymakers and other stakeholders 3. The recognition that many stakeholders can add significant value to these processes, and 4. The recognition that many stakeholders can take action to address high-priority issues, and not just policymakers. In this article, (more)
add to your list
11.

SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 7: finding systematic reviews

Lewin, Simon; Lavis, John N; Oxman, Andrew D; Johansen, Marit; Grimshaw, Jeremy; Boyko, Jennifer A; Fretheim, Atle
EVIPNet Repository | Language(s): English
Source: Health Research Policy and Systems. 2
This article is part of a series written for people responsible for making decisions about health policies and programmes and for those who support these decision makers. Systematic reviews are increasingly seen as a key source of information in policymaking, particularly in terms of assisting with descriptions of the impacts of options. Relative to single studies they offer a number of advantages related to understanding impacts and are also seen as a key source of information for clarifying problems and providing complementary perspectives on options. Systematic reviews can be undertaken to place problems in comparative perspective and to describe the likely harms of an option. They also assist with understanding the meanings that individuals or groups attach to a pro (more)
add to your list
12.

SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 9: assessing the applicability of the findings of a systematic review

Lavis, JN; Lewin, S; Gruen, RL; Oxman, AD; Fretheim, A; Souza, NM
EVIPNet Repository | Language(s): English
Source: Health Research Policy and Systems. 2
This article is part of a series written for people responsible for making decisions about health policies and programmes and for those who support these decision makers. Differences between health systems may often result in a policy or programme option that is used in one setting not being feasible or acceptable in another. Or these differences may result in an option not working in the same way in another setting, or even achieving different impacts in another setting. A key challenge that policymakers and those supporting them must face is therefore the need to understand whether research evidence about an option can be applied to their setting. Systematic reviews make this task easier by summarising the evidence from studies conducted in a variety of different settings.
add to your list
13.

SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP). 4: using research evidence to clarify a problem

Wilson, Michael G; Lewin, Simon; Oxman, Andrew D; Fretheim, Atle; Lavis, John N
EVIPNet Repository | Language(s): English
Source: Health Research Policy and Systems. 2
This article is part of a series written for people responsible for making decisions about health policies and programmes and for those who support these decision makers. Policymakers and those supporting them often find themselves in situations that spur them on to work out how best to define a problem. These situations may range from being asked an awkward or challenging question in the legislature, through to finding a problem highlighted on the front page of a newspaper. The motivations for policymakers wanting to clarify a problem are diverse. These may range from deciding whether to pay serious attention to a particular problem that others claim is important, through to wondering how to convince others to agree that a problem is important. Debates and struggles over how to define a problem are a critically important part of the policymaking process.
add to your list
14.

SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 5: using research evidence to frame options to address a problem

Lewin, Simon; Grimshaw, Jeremy; Oxman, Andrew D; Wilson, Michael G; Lavis, John N; Fretheim, Atle
EVIPNet Repository | Language(s): English
Source: Health Research Policy and Systems. 2
This article is part of a series written for people responsible for making decisions about health policies and programmes and for those who support these decision makers. Policymakers and those supporting them may find themselves in one or more of the following three situations that will require them to characterise the costs and consequences of options to address a problem. These are: 1. A decision has already been taken and their role is to maximise the benefits of an option, minimise its harms, optimise the impacts achieved for the money spent, and (if there is substantial uncertainty about the likely costs and consequences of the option) to design a monitoring and evaluation plan, 2. A policymaking process is already underway and their role is to assess the options presented to them, or 3.
add to your list
15.

SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 12: finding and using research evidence about resource use and costs

Lavis, JN; Oxman, AD; Fretheim, A; Lewin, S
EVIPNet Repository | Language(s): English
Source: Health Research Policy and Systems. 2
In this article, we address considerations about resource use and costs. The consequences of a policy or programme option for resource use differ from other impacts (both in terms of benefits and harms) in several ways. However, considerations of the consequences of options for resource use are similar to considerations related to other impacts in that policymakers and their staff need to identify important impacts on resource use, acquire and appraise the best available evidence regarding those impacts, and ensure that appropriate monetary values have been applied. We suggest four questions that can be considered when assessing resource use and the cost consequences of an option. These are: 1. What are the most important impacts on resource use? 2. What evidence is the (more)
Results  1-15 de 75