2,998 research outputs found
Building health research systems to achieve better health
Health research systems can link knowledge generation with practical concerns to improve health
and health equity. Interest in health research, and in how health research systems should best be
organised, is moving up the agenda of bodies such as the World Health Organisation. Pioneering
health research systems, for example those in Canada and the UK, show that progress is possible.
However, radical steps are required to achieve this. Such steps should be based on evidence not
anecdotes.
Health Research Policy and Systems (HARPS) provides a vehicle for the publication of research, and
informed opinion, on a range of topics related to the organisation of health research systems and
the enormous benefits that can be achieved. Following the Mexico ministerial summit on health
research, WHO has been identifying ways in which it could itself improve the use of research
evidence. The results from this activity are soon to be published as a series of articles in HARPS.
This editorial provides an account of some of these recent key developments in health research
systems but places them in the context of a distinguished tradition of debate about the role of
science in society. It also identifies some of the main issues on which 'research on health research'
has already been conducted and published, in some cases in HARPS. Finding and retaining adequate
financial and human resources to conduct health research is a major problem, especially in low and
middle income countries where the need is often greatest. Research ethics and agenda-setting that
responds to the demands of the public are issues of growing concern. Innovative and collaborative
ways are being found to organise the conduct and utilisation of research so as to inform policy, and
improve health and health equity. This is crucial, not least to achieve the health-related Millennium
Development Goals. But much more progress is needed. The editorial ends by listing a wide range
of topics related to the above priorities on which we hope to feature further articles in HARPS and
thus contribute to an informed debate on how best to achieve such progress
Recommended from our members
The utilisation of health research in policy-making: Concepts, examples, and methods of assessment
Chapter 1: Introduction and Background
• The importance of utilising health research in policy-making, and therefore the need to understand the mechanisms involved, is increasingly recognised. Recent reports calling for more resources to improve health in developing countries, and global pressures for accountability, draw greater attention to research-informed policy-making.
• For at least twenty years there has been recognition of the multiple meanings or models of research utilisation in policy-making. It has similarly been long recognised that a range of factors is involved in the interactions between health research and policy-makers.
• The emerging focus on Health Research Systems (HRS) has identified additional mechanisms through which greater utilisation of research could be achieved. Assessment of the role of health research in policy-making is best undertaken as part of a wider study that also includes the utilisation of health research by industry, medical practitioners, and the public.
Chapter 2: The Nature of Policy-Making, Types of Research and Utilisation Models
• Policy-making broadly interpreted includes national health policies made by government ministers and officials, policies made by local health service managers, and clinical guidelines from professional bodies. In this report, however, the main focus is on public policy-making rather than that conducted by professional bodies. The utilisation of health research in policy-making should eventually lead to desired outcomes, including health gains. Research can make a contribution in at least three phases of the policy-making process: agenda setting; policy formulation; and implementation. Descriptions of these processes, however, can over-estimate the degree of rationality in policy-making. Therefore, the analysis is informed by a review of the full range of policy-making models. These include rational and incrementalist models.
• Various categories of research are likely to be used differently in health policy-making. Applied research might be more readily useable by a policy system than basic research, but health policy-makers tend to relate more willingly to natural sciences than social sciences. When research is based on the priorities of potential users, and/or is research of proven quality, this increases the possibility that it will be translated into policies. There also appears to be a greater chance of research being used in clinical policies about delivering care to patients, than in national policies on the structures of the health service.
• Models of research utilisation in policy-making start with a link to rational or instrumental views of policy-making, and include descriptions of how commissioned research can help to find solutions to problems. Other models relate to an incrementalist view in which policy-making involves a series of small steps over a long period; research findings might gradually cause a shift in perceptions about an issue in a process of ‘enlightenment’. Interactive models of research utilisation stress the way in which policy-makers and researchers might develop links over a long period. Research can also be used symbolically to support decisions already taken.
Chapter 3: Examples from Previous Studies
• A study of health policy-making in two southern African countries illustrates how policy-making processes can be analysed. It addresses agenda setting, policy formulation and implementation. The methods used included documentary analysis and key informant interviews.
• Many previous studies of research utilisation can provide lessons for future assessments. Two broad approaches can be identified. Some studies start with pieces, or programmes, of research and examine their impact. Others consider policy on a particular topic and assess the role of research in the policy-making. There are advantages and drawbacks in each approach, and overlaps between them.
• To facilitate comparison, studies of research utilisation are best organised around a conceptual framework. Despite that, the influence of contextual factors in different settings makes it difficult to generalise.
• The two methods used most frequently, and usually together, come from the qualitative tradition: documentary analysis and in-depth interviews. Questionnaires, bibliometric analysis, insider knowledge and historical approaches have all been applied. A few recent studies have attempted to score or scale the level of utilisation.
• The examples suggest there is a greater level of utilisation and final outcomes in terms of health, health equity, and social and economic gain than is often assumed, whilst still showing much underutilisation. There is considerable variation in the degree of utilisation, both within and between studies.
Chapter 4: Key Issues in the Analysis of Research Utilisation in Policy-Making
• Increasing attention is focusing on the concept of interfaces between researchers and the users of research. This incorporates the idea that there are likely to be different values and interests between the two communities.
• In relation to utilisation, the prioritisation debate revolves around two key aspects: whether priorities are being set that will produce research that policy-makers and others will want to use, and whether priorities are being set that will engage the interests and commitment of the research community.
• Interactions across the interface between policy-makers and researchers are important in transferring research to policy-makers. This fits especially well with the interactive model of utilisation. Actions by individual researchers can be useful in generating interaction, but it is desirable to consider the role of the HRS in encouraging or facilitating interactions, networks and mechanisms at a system-wide level. The HRS could provide funding and organisational support for various items including: long-term research centres; research brokerage/translator mechanisms; the creation of official committees of policy-makers and researchers; and mechanisms for review and synthesis of research findings.
• There is increased recognition of the significance of policy-makers in their role as the receptors of research. In relation to the perspective of policy-makers there is a spectrum of key questions. These range from whether relevant research is available and effectively being brought to their attention, to whether they are able to absorb it and willing to use it. The HRS has a responsibility, especially in the early parts of the spectrum, but the wider health system also has a responsibility to create appropriate institutional mechanisms and ensure there are staff willing and able to incorporate relevant research.
• More attention should be given to the role of incentives, both for researchers to produce utilisable research, and for policy-makers, at the system or individual level, to use it. The assessment of utilisation becomes a key issue if rewards are to focus on relevance as well as research excellence.
• An appropriate model for assessing research utilisation in policy-making combines analysis of two issues: the role of receptors and the importance of actions at the interfaces. An emphasis on the role of the receptor is necessary because ultimately it is up to the policy-maker to make the decisions. Any assessment of the success of the HRS in relation to utilisation must accept that the wider political context is beyond the control of the HRS, but consider the activities of the HRS, within its given context, to enhance the utilisation of research by increasing the permeability of the interfaces.
Chapter 5: Assessment of Research Utilisation in Health Policy-Making
• The reasons for assessing the utilisation of research in policy-making include: advocacy, accountability, and increased understanding. For the World Health Organization there could be a role in conducting such assessments with the aim of providing evidence of the effective use of research resources. This could support advocacy for greater resources to be made available for health research. It is important that the purposes of any assessment are taken into account in planning the methods to be used.
• Previous studies demonstrated the difficulties of making generalisations about specific factors associated with high levels of utilisation. To address this in any cross-national WHO initiative involving a series of studies in a range of countries, it would be desirable to structure all the studies around a conceptual framework (such as the interfaces and receptor framework considered here) and base the studies in each country on common themes. These could include policies for the adoption of multi-drug therapy for treating leprosy, and for the equitable access to health services.
• Analysis of documents and semi-structured interviews would be appropriate methods in each study assessing the role of research in policy-making on a specific policy theme. Questionnaires could also have a role. These approaches would provide triangulation of methods and data-sources and should also provide material to help identify the relative importance, in relation to the level of utilisation recorded, of the HRS mechanisms described in the previous analysis. The types and sources of research used, and reasons for their use, should also be recorded and attempts made to correlate them with the previous priority setting approaches. It is expected that each study will produce its own narrative or story of what caused utilisation in the particular context, but the data gathered could also be applied to descriptive scales of the level research utilisation. The four scales could cover the consistency of policy with research findings, and the degree of influence of research on agenda setting, policy formulation, and implementation.
• The findings from the assessments in each participating country should be collated. For each policy theme or topic the analysis would compare two sets of data: the scales for level of research utilisation in each country, and the contextualised lists of the HRS activities and other mechanisms and networks thought to be important. Although the account here has focused on research impact on policy-making, the evaluations would be stronger as part of a wider analysis covering research utilisation and interactions with practitioners, industry and the public.
• Given appropriate and targeted topic and country selection, this approach is likely to meet the purpose of using structured methods to provide examples of effective research utilisation. The approach should contribute towards enhanced understanding of the issues and could provide the basis of an assessment tool which, if used widely in countries, could lead to greater utilisation of health research.Research Policy and Co-operation (RPC) Department of the World Health Organization, Geneva; UK Department of Health’s Policy Research Programme; Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research from the governments of Norway and Sweden; World Bank and International Development Research Council of Canad
The state of international collaboration for health systems research: what do publications tell?
AIM: International collaboration for health system development has been identified as a critical input to meet pressing global health needs. North-South collaboration has the potential to benefit both parties, while South-South collaboration offers promise to strengthen capacity rapidly and efficiently across developing countries. There is an emerging trend to analyze the fruits of such collaboration. This paper builds on this trend by applying an innovative concept-based bibliometric method to identify the international scope of collaboration within the field of health policy and systems research. Two key questions are addressed: to what extent are papers comparing developing countries as against reporting on single country studies? To what extent are papers in either case being produced by researchers within their respective countries or through North-South or South-South collaboration? METHODS: A total of 8,751 papers published in Medline between 1999 and 2003 with data on health systems and policies in developing countries were identified and content-analyzed using an innovative concept-based search technology. A sample of 13% of papers was used to identify the corresponding institution and countries covered. The sampled data was then analyzed by income group. RESULTS: Papers with an international, cross-country focus account for only 10% of the total. Just over a third of all papers are led by upper middle income country authors, closely followed by authors from high income countries. Just under half of all papers target low income countries. Cross-country papers are led mostly by institutions in high income countries, with 74% of the total. Only seven countries concentrate 60% of the papers led by developing country institutions. Institutions in the United States and the United Kingdom concentrate between them as many as 68% of the papers led by high income countries. Only 11% of all single-country papers and 21% of multi-country studies are the product of South-South collaboration. Health Financing is the topic with the greatest international scope, with 26% of all papers in the topic. Topics such as Costing and Cost Effectiveness, Finance, Sector Analysis and Insurance, regardless of their national or international scope, are led in 38% to 54% of cases by high income authors. CONCLUSION: While there is modest health systems research capacity in many developing countries for single country studies, capacity is severely limited for multi-country studies. While North-South collaboration is important, the number of international studies is still very limited to produce the kind of knowledge required to learn from experiences across countries. The fact that lead institutions as well as study countries are concentrated in a handful of mostly middle income countries attests to great disparities in research capacity. However, disparities in research capacity and interest are also evident in the North. It is urgent to build cross-country research capacity including appropriate forms of South-South and North-South collaboration
Leadership, institution building and pay-back of health systems research in Mexico
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Health systems research is being increasingly called upon to support scaling up of disease control interventions and to support rapid health sector change. Yet research capacity building and pay-back take years or even decades to be demonstrated, while leadership and institution building are critical for their success. The case of Mexico can be illustrative for middle income countries and emerging economies striving to build health research systems.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Historical reflection suggests the relationship between health sector reforms and economic crisis, on the one hand, and research capacity building and payback, on the other. Mexico's post-revolutionary background and its three health sector reforms are analyzed to identify the emphases given to health systems research.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The first wave of health reform in the 1940s emphasized clinical and epidemiological research. Health systems research was not encouraged in a context of rapid economic development and an authoritarian regime. In contrast, health systems research was given a privileged place with the second wave of health reforms in the 1980s, which addressed health system coordination, decentralization and the universal right to health in a context of a deep economic crisis. The third wave of health reforms between 2003 and 2006 was based on the health system models proposed through research in the 90s. The credibility gained by research institutions was critical to ensure government uptake. Research influence can be traced through the role it played in defining a problem, in designing innovative insurance mechanisms and in establishing evaluation frameworks. It is argued that the Ministry of Health's budget increase of 56% between 2003 and 2006 and the reductions in inequity are pay-back to research investments since the 1980s.</p
Kinesin's backsteps under mechanical load
Kinesins move processively toward the plus end of microtubules by hydrolyzing
ATP for each step. From an enzymatic perspective, the mechanism of mechanical
motion coupled to the nucleotide chemistry is often well explained using a
single-loop cyclic reaction. However, several difficulties arise in
interpreting kinesin's backstepping within this framework, especially when
external forces oppose the motion of kinesin. We review evidence, such as an
ATP-independent stall force and a slower cycle time for backsteps, that has
emerged to challenge the idea that kinesin backstepping is due to ATP
synthesis, i.e., the reverse cycle of kinesin's forward-stepping
chemomechanics. Supplementing the conventional single-loop chemomechanics with
routes for ATP-hydrolyzing backward steps and nucleotide-free steps, especially
under load, gives a better physical interpretation of the experimental data on
backsteps.Comment: 5 figures and 2 table
Mapping of health system functions to strengthen priority programs. The case of maternal health in Mexico
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Health system strengthening is critical to ensure the integration and scaling-up of priority health promotion, disease prevention and control programs. Normative guidelines are available to address health system function imbalances while strategic and analytical frameworks address critical functions in complex systems. Tacit knowledge-based health system constructs can help identify actors' perspectives, contributing to improve strengthening strategies. Using maternal health as an example, this paper maps and analyses the health system functions that critical actors charged with formulating and delivering priority health programs consider important for their success.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Using concept mapping qualitative and statistical methods, health system functions were mapped for different categories of actors in high maternal mortality states of Mexico and at the federal level. Functions within and across maps were analyzed for degree of classification, importance, feasibility and coding.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Hospital infrastructure and human resource training are the most prominent functions in the maternal health system, associated to federal efforts to support emergency obstetric care. Health policy is a highly diffuse function while program development, intercultural and community participation and social networks are clearly stated although less focused and with lower perceived importance. The importance of functions is less correlated between federal and state decision makers, between federal decision makers and reproductive health/local health area program officers and between state decision makers and system-wide support officers. Two sets of oppositions can be observed in coding across functions: health sector vs. social context; and given structures vs. manageable processes.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Concept mapping enabled the identification of critical functions constituting adaptive maternal health systems, including aspects of actor perspectives that are seldom included in normative and analytical frameworks. Important areas of divergence across actors' perceptions were identified to target capacity strengthening efforts towards better integrated, performing health systems.</p
Evidence-informed health policy: are we beginning to get there at last
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited
Minimally invasive presacral approach for revision of an Axial Lumbar Interbody Fusion rod due to fall-related lumbosacral instability: a case report
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>The purpose of this study was to describe procedural details of a minimally invasive presacral approach for revision of an L5-S1 Axial Lumbar Interbody Fusion rod.</p> <p>Case presentation</p> <p>A 70-year-old Caucasian man presented to our facility with marked thoracolumbar scoliosis, osteoarthritic changes characterized by high-grade osteophytes, and significant intervertebral disc collapse and calcification. Our patient required crutches during ambulation and reported intractable axial and radicular pain. Multi-level reconstruction of L1-4 was accomplished with extreme lateral interbody fusion, although focal lumbosacral symptoms persisted due to disc space collapse at L5-S1.</p> <p>Lumbosacral interbody distraction and stabilization was achieved four weeks later with the Axial Lumbar Interbody Fusion System (TranS1 Inc., Wilmington, NC, USA) and rod implantation via an axial presacral approach.</p> <p>Despite symptom resolution following this procedure, our patient suffered a fall six weeks postoperatively with direct sacral impaction resulting in symptom recurrence and loss of L5-S1 distraction. Following seven months of unsuccessful conservative care, a revision of the Axial Lumbar Interbody Fusion rod was performed that utilized the same presacral approach and used a larger diameter implant. Minimal adhesions were encountered upon presacral re-entry. A precise operative trajectory to the base of the previously implanted rod was achieved using fluoroscopic guidance. Surgical removal of the implant was successful with minimal bone resection required. A larger diameter Axial Lumbar Interbody Fusion rod was then implanted and joint distraction was re-established. The radicular symptoms resolved following revision surgery and our patient was ambulating without assistance on post-operative day one. No adverse events were reported.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The Axial Lumbar Interbody Fusion distraction rod may be revised and replaced with a larger diameter rod using the same presacral approach.</p
The relevance of neck linker docking in the motility of kinesin
Conventional kinesin is a motor protein, which is able to walk along a
microtubule processively. The exact mechanism of the stepping motion and force
generation of kinesin is still far from clear. In this paper we argue that neck
linker docking is a crucial element of this mechanism, without which the
experimentally observed dwell times of the steps could not be explained under a
wide range of loading forces. We also show that the experimental data impose
very strict constraints on the lengths of both the neck linker and its docking
section, which are compatible with the known structure of kinesin.Comment: Accepted for publication in BioSystems as part of the proceedings of
BIOCOMP 200
- …