A systematic review of frameworks for the interrelationships of mental health evidence and policy in low- and middle-income countries

Background: The interrelationships between research evidence and policy-making are complex. Different theoretical frameworks exist to explain general evidence–policy interactions. One largely unexplored element of these interrelationships is how evidence interrelates with, and influences, policy/political agenda-setting. This review aims to identify the elements and processes of theories, frameworks and models on interrelationships of research evidence and health policy-making, with a focus on actionability and agenda-setting in the context of mental health in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: A systematic review of theories was conducted based on the BeHeMOTh search method, using a tested and refined search strategy. Nine electronic databases and other relevant sources were searched for peer-reviewed and grey literature. Two reviewers screened the abstracts, reviewed full-text articles, extracted data and performed quality assessments. Analysis was based on a thematic analysis. The included papers had to present an actionable theoretical framework/model on evidence and policy interrelationships, such as knowledge translation or evidence-based policy, specifically target the agenda-setting process, focus on mental health, be from LMICs and published in English. Results: From 236 publications included in the full text analysis, no studies fully complied with our inclusion criteria. Widening the focus by leaving out ‘agenda-setting’, we included ten studies, four of which had unique conceptual frameworks focusing on mental health and LMICs but not agenda-setting. The four analysed frameworks confirmed research gaps from LMICs and mental health, and a lack of focus on agenda-setting. Frameworks and models from other health and policy areas provide interesting conceptual approaches and lessons with regards to agenda-setting. Conclusion: Our systematic review identified frameworks on evidence and policy interrelations that differ in their elements and processes. No framework fulfilled all inclusion criteria. Four actionable frameworks are applicable to mental health and LMICs, but none specifically target agenda-setting. We have identified agenda-setting as a research theory gap in the context of mental health knowledge translation in LMICs. Frameworks from other health/policy areas could offer lessons on agenda-setting and new approaches for creating policy impact for mental health and to tackle the translational gap in LMICs

Dynamic Agenda Setting

A party in power can address a limited number of issues. What issues to address--the party's agenda--has dynamic implications because it affects what issues will be addressed in the future. We analyze a model in which the incumbent addresses one issue among many and the remaining issues roll over to the next period. We show that no strategic manipulation arises without checks and balances and identify strategic manipulations in the forms of waiting for the moment, seizing the moment, steering, and preemption with checks and balances depending on how power fluctuates. We also discuss efficiency implications

An agenda-setting model of electoral competition

This paper presents a model of electoral competition focusing on the formation of the public agenda. An incumbent government and a challenger party in opposition compete in elections by choosing the issues that will key out their campaigns. Giving salience to an issue implies proposing an innovative policy proposal, alternative to the status-quo. Parties trade off the issues with high salience in voters’ concerns and those with broad agreement on some alternative policy proposal. Each party expects a higher probability of victory if the issue it chooses becomes salient in the voters’ decision. But remarkably, the issues which are considered the most important ones by a majority of votes may not be given salience during the electoral campaign. An incumbent government may survive in spite of its bad policy performance if there is no sufficiently broad agreement on a policy alternative. We illustrate the analytical potential of the model with the case of the United States presidential election in 2004.Agenda, elections, political competition, issues, salience, agreement.

Deliberative Agenda Setting: Piloting Reform of Direct Democracy in California

Can the people deliberate to set the agenda for direct democracy in large scale states? How might such an institution work? The 2011 California Deliberative Poll piloted a solution to this problem helping to produce proposals that went to the ballot and also to the legislature. The paper reports on how this pilot worked and what it suggests about a possible institution to solve the deliberative agenda setting problem. The legislative proposal passed the legislature but the ballot proposition (Prop 31) failed. However, we show that the proposals actually deliberated on by the people might well have passed if not encumbered by additional elements not deliberated on by the public that drew opposition. The paper ends with an outline of how the process of deliberative agenda setting for the initiative might work, vetting proposals once every two years that could get on the ballot for a greatly reduced cost in signature collections. Adding deliberation to the agenda setting process would allow for a thoughtful and informed public will formation to determine the agenda for direct democracy

Applying Agenda-Setting Theory to Consumer Products: Oregon Wine

This project examines how Oregon winemakers present themselves to the media and their consumers, and whether or not their portrayal is received correctly by these sources. This research focuses mainly on what message producers convey to the media and how that, in turn, reaches consumers, while focusing more specifically on Oregon winemakers. The goals for this project are to further agenda-setting research in regards to consumer products and to advance the meaningfulness of mass communication and public relations

Marching orders? : U.S. party platforms and legislative agenda setting 1948-2014

What is the relationship between the priorities expressed in party platforms before an election and the subsequent legislative agenda? The agenda setting literature often deemphasizes the role of political parties in agenda setting. However, parties will often express different issue priorities during elections, and compete based on those priorities. The paper utilizes new data from the U.S. Policy Agendas Project and Wolbrecht (2016) on policy attention in U.S. party platforms to study the relationship between U.S. parties and legislative activities in Congress. A time series cross sectional analysis finds strong evidence to support the proposition that legislative agendas are influenced by the platform of the President’s party in the short term, although the relationship differs for different types of agendas and by issue, and fades over time.Governmen

Trends of Agenda Setting Research: A Bibliometric and A Thematic Meta-Analysis

Agenda-setting studies continue to experience an evolutionary process. It goes beyond its initial assumption, which is the transfer of meaning from the media agenda to the public agenda, and expands to experience replication. Recent literature studies regarding the mapping of agenda-setting studies have not been carried out much. Therefore, this study aims to find trends in agenda setting research in the global scope based on agenda setting data from 2014 to 2022. Trends in the global scope are interesting to study to see agenda-setting studies today. This study uses the Bibliometric Analysis and a thematic theme analysis approaches. The research show that politics-related topics have dominated over the last eight years. The use of network agenda-setting (NAS) and agenda-setting intermedia (IAS) theory, content analysis and survey, and Twitter are essentials part of this study. The entire development of digital media is slowly leaving conventional media. Therefore, future studies, in the presence of a variety of media platforms, need to design alternative models and methodologies that can explain the power of influence of each media in shaping the agenda-setting effect