40 research outputs found
Different recipes for the same dish: Comparing policies for scientific excellence across different countries
How to strengthen a health research system: WHO's review, whose literature and who is providing leadership?
Background
Health research is important for the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals. However, there are many challenges facing health research, including securing sufficient funds, building capacity, producing research findings and using both local and global evidence, and avoiding waste. A WHO initiative addressed these challenges by developing a conceptual framework with four functions to guide the development of national health research systems. Despite some progress, more is needed before health research systems can meet their full potential of improving health systems. The WHO Regional Office for Europe commissioned an evidence synthesis of the systems-level literature. This Opinion piece considers its findings before reflecting on the vast additional literature available on the range of specific health research system functions related to the various challenges. Finally, it considers who should lead research system strengthening.
Main text
The evidence synthesis identifies two main approaches for strengthening national health research systems, namely implementing comprehensive and coherent strategies and participation in partnerships. The literature describing these approaches at the systems level also provides data on ways to strengthen each of the four functions of governance, securing financing, capacity-building, and production and use of research. Countries effectively implementing strategies include England, Ireland and Rwanda, whereas West Africa experienced effective partnerships. Recommended policy approaches for system strengthening are context specific. The vast literature on each function and the ever-growing evidence-base are illustrated by considering papers in just one key journal, Health Research Policy and Systems, and analysing the contribution of two national studies. A review of the functions of the Iranian system identifies over 200 relevant and mostly national records; an analysis of the creation of the English National Institute for Health Research describes the key leadership role played by the health department. Furthermore, WHO is playing leadership roles in helping coordinate partnerships within and across health research systems that have been attempting to tackle the COVID-19 crisis.
Conclusions
The evidence synthesis provides a firm basis for decision-making by policy-makers and research leaders looking to strengthen national health research systems within their own national context. It identifies five crucial policy approaches — conducting situation analysis, sustaining a comprehensive strategy, engaging stakeholders, evaluating impacts on health systems, and partnership participation. The vast and ever-growing additional literature could provide further perspectives, including on crucial leadership roles for health ministries.Health Evidence Network Evidence Synthesis; NIH
The role of evaluation in socialising S&T in the ERA
Key challenges and opportunities are outlined in the ERA perspective and the role of evaluation as an instrument in the socialisation of science and technology is explored. Only an integrated and highly socialised science and technology, deeply embedded in society and involving all the relevant stakeholders, can address the complex problems Europe faces today and thus improve its research position and competitiveness worldwide
Research management and policy: incentives and obstacles to a better public‐private interaction
Integrating context in the evaluation of gender equality interventions and beyond
Während der letzten Jahrzehnte haben die Europäische Union und ihre Mitgliedsstaaten die Gleichstellungspolitik in Forschungsorganisationen gefördert.
Allerdings war die Bewertung dessen, was die politischen Interventionen erreicht haben, begrenzt. Das von H2020 finanzierte EFFORTI-Projekt, das auf einem Co-Kreationsprozess basiert, an dem die wichtigsten europäischen Interessenvertreter beteiligt sind, hat sich zum Ziel gesetzt, diese Forschungslücke zu schließen, indem es einen Evaluierungsrahmen für die Konzeption und Bewertung von Gleichstellungsmaßnahmen in Forschung und Innovation entwickelt hat. Die Analyse von Interventionen in einer Reihe von europäischen Ländern hat gezeigt, wie wichtig es ist, die nationalen und organisatorischen Kontexte in Gleichstellungspolitiken und Evaluierungsregimen zu berücksichtigen. Der Kontext spielt eine entscheidende Rolle, wenn es um die Bewertung von Outputs, Ergebnissen und Auswirkungen von politischen Interventionen geht, und muss bei jeder Erklärung von Veränderungen berücksichtigt werden. Daher müssen Evaluierungsansätze sicherstellen, dass Design und Evaluierung von Interventionen kontextsensitiv und theoriebasiert sind, um die "Black Box" von Programmen zu öffnen und so zu vermeiden, dass die Evaluierung nur die Wirkungen betrachtet, ohne die zugrunde liegenden Mechanismen zu berücksichtigen, die sie hervorbringen. Auf der Grundlage der im Rahmen des EFFORTI-Projekts gewonnenen Erfahrungen schlagen wir hiermit ein kontextsensitives Logikmodell für Interventionen vor, die sich mit geschlechtsspezifischer Gewalt und Belästigung befassen. Der vorgeschlagene Ansatz kann eine Inspirationsquelle für politische Entscheidungsträger und Evaluatoren sein, die mit Maßnahmen zur Förderung der Geschlechtergleichstellung in komplexen Kontexten und in Studienbereichen arbeiten, die über die Geschlechtergleichstellung hinausgehen