Enhancing evidence informed policymaking in complex health systems: lessons from multi-site collaborative approaches

CITATION: Langlois, E. V., et al. 2016. Enhancing evidence informed policymaking in complex health systems: lessons from multi-site collaborative approaches. Health Research Policy and Systems, 14:20, doi:10.1186/s12961-016-0089-0.The original publication is available at http://health-policy-systems.biomedcentral.comENGLISH SUMMARY : Background: There is an increasing interest worldwide to ensure evidence-informed health policymaking as a means to improve health systems performance. There is a need to engage policymakers in collaborative approaches to generate and use knowledge in real world settings. To address this gap, we implemented two interventions based on iterative exchanges between researchers and policymakers/implementers. This article aims to reflect on the implementation and impact of these multi-site evidence-to-policy approaches implemented in low-resource settings. Methods: The first approach was implemented in Mexico and Nicaragua and focused on implementation research facilitated by communities of practice (CoP) among maternal health stakeholders. We conducted a process evaluation of the CoPs and assessed the professionals’ abilities to acquire, analyse, adapt and apply research. The second approach, called the Policy BUilding Demand for evidence in Decision making through Interaction and Enhancing Skills (Policy BUDDIES), was implemented in South Africa and Cameroon. The intervention put forth a ‘buddying’ process to enhance demand and use of systematic reviews by sub-national policymakers. The Policy BUDDIES initiative was assessed using a mixed-methods realist evaluation design. Results: In Mexico, the implementation research supported by CoPs triggered monitoring by local health organizations of the quality of maternal healthcare programs. Health programme personnel involved in CoPs in Mexico and Nicaragua reported improved capacities to identify and use evidence in solving implementation problems. In South Africa, Policy BUDDIES informed a policy framework for medication adherence for chronic diseases, including both HIV and non-communicable diseases. Policymakers engaged in the buddying process reported an enhanced recognition of the value of research, and greater demand for policy-relevant knowledge. Conclusions: The collaborative evidence-to-policy approaches underline the importance of iterations and continuity in the engagement of researchers and policymakers/programme managers, in order to account for swift evolutions in health policy planning and implementation. In developing and supporting evidence-to-policy interventions, due consideration should be given to fit-for-purpose approaches, as different needs in policymaking cycles require adapted processes and knowledge. Greater consideration should be provided to approaches embedding the use of research in real-world policymaking, better suited to the complex adaptive nature of health systems.http://health-policy-systems.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12961-016-0089-0Publisher's versio

Health systems changes after decentralisation: Progress, challenges and dynamics in Pakistan

Decentralisation is widely practised but its scrutiny tends to focus on structural and authority changes or outcomes. Politics and process of devolution implementation needs to be better understood to evaluate how national governments use the enhanced decision space for bringing improvements in the health system and the underlying challenges faced. We use the example of Pakistan\u27s radical, politically driven provincial devolution to analyse how national structures use decentralisation opportunities for improved health planning, spending and carrying out transformations to the health system. Our narrative draws on secondary data sources from the PRIMASYS study, supplemented with policy roundtable notes from Pakistan. Our analysis shows that in decentralised Pakistan, health became prioritised for increased government resources and achieved good budgetary use, major strides were made contextualised sector-wide health planning and legislations, and a proliferation seen in governance measures to improve and regulate healthcare delivery. Despite a disadvantaged and abrupt start to devolution, high ownership by politicians and bureaucracy in provincial governments led to resourcing, planning and innovations. However, effective translation remained impeded by weak institutional capacity, feeble federal-provincial coordination and vulnerability to interference by local elites. Building on this illustrative example, we propose (1) political management of decentralisation for effective national coordination, sustaining stable leadership and protecting from political interfere by local elites; (2) investment in stewardship capacity in the devolved structures as well as the central ministry to deliver on new roles

Paper 1: Demand-driven rapid reviews for health policy and systems decision-making: lessons from Lebanon, Ethiopia, and South Africa on researchers and policymakers’ experiences

Background: Rapid reviews have emerged as an approach to provide contextualized evidence in a timely and efficient manner. Three rapid review centers were established in Ethiopia, Lebanon, and South Africa through the Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research, World Health Organization, to stimulate demand, engage policymakers, and produce rapid reviews to support health policy and systems decision-making. This study aimed to assess the experiences of researchers and policymakers engaged in producing and using rapid reviews for health systems strengthening and decisions towards universal health coverage (UHC). Methods: Using a case study approach with qualitative research methods, experienced researchers conducted semi-structured interviews with respondents from each center (n = 16). The topics covered included the process and experience of establishing the centers, stimulating demand for rapid reviews, collaborating between researchers and policymakers, and disseminating and using rapid reviews for health policies and interventions and the potential for sustaining and institutionalizing the services. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results: Major themes interacted and contributed to shape the experiences of stakeholders of the rapid review centers, including the following: organizational structural arrangements of the centers, management of their processes as input factors, and the rapid reviews as the immediate policy-relevant outputs. The engagement process and the rapid review products contributed to a final theme of impact of the rapid review centers in relation to the uptake of evidence for policy and systems decision-making. Conclusions: The experiences of policymakers and researchers of the rapid review centers determined the uptake of evidence. The findings of this study can inform policymakers, health system managers, and researchers on best practices for demanding, developing and using rapid reviews to support decision- and policymaking, and implementing the universal healthcare coverage agenda

Provision of postpartum care to women giving birth in health facilities in sub-Saharan Africa: A cross-sectional study using Demographic and Health Survey data from 33 countries.

BACKGROUND: Postpartum care has the potential to avert a substantial proportion of maternal and perinatal mortality and morbidity. There is a crucial gap in understanding the quality of postpartum care for women giving birth in health facilities in low- and middle-income settings. This is particularly the case in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), where the levels of maternal and neonatal mortality are highest globally despite rapid increases in facility-based childbirth. This study estimated the percentage of women receiving a postpartum health check following childbirth in a health facility in SSA and examined the determinants of receiving such check. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We used the most recent Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) conducted in 33 SSA countries between 2000-2016. We estimated the percentage of women receiving a postpartum check by a health professional while in the childbirth facility and the associated 95% confidence interval (CI) for each country. We analyzed determinants of receiving such checks using logistic regression of the pooled data. The analysis sample included 137,218 women whose most recent live birth in the 5- year period before the survey took place in a health facility. Of this pooled sample, 65.7% of women were under 30 years of age, 85.9% were currently married, and 57% resided in rural areas. Across countries, the median percentage of women who reported receiving a check was 71.7%, ranging from 26.6% in Eswatini (Swaziland) to 94.4% in Burkina Faso. The most fully adjusted model showed that factors from all four conceptual categories (obstetric/neonatal risk factors, care environment, and women's sociodemographic and child-related characteristics) were significant determinants of receiving a check. Women with a cesarean section had a significantly higher adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of 1.88 (95% CI 1.72-2.05, p < 0.001) of receiving a check. Women giving birth in lower-level public facilities had lower odds of receiving a check (aOR 0.94, 95% CI 0.90-0.98, p = 0.002) compared to those in public hospitals, as did women attended by a nurse/midwife (compared to doctor/nonphysician clinician) (aOR 0.74, 95% CI 0.69-0.78, p < 0.001). This study was limited by the accuracy of the respondent's recall of the provider, timing, and receipt of postpartum checks. The outcome of interest was measured using three slightly different question sets across the 33 included countries. CONCLUSIONS: The suboptimal levels of postpartum checks in health facilities in many of the included SSA countries partially reflect the lack of importance given to postpartum care in the global discourse on essential interventions and quality improvement in maternal health. Addressing disparities in access to both facility-based childbirth and good-quality postpartum care in SSA is critical to addressing stalling declines in maternal mortality and morbidity

Protocol for the development of guidance for stakeholder engagement in health and healthcare guideline development and implementation

Stakeholder engagement has become widely accepted as a necessary component of guideline development and implementation. While frameworks for developing guidelines express the need for those potentially affected by guideline recommendations to be involved in their development, there is a lack of consensus on how this should be done in practice. Further, there is a lack of guidance on how to equitably and meaningfully engage multiple stakeholders. We aim to develop guidance for the meaningful and equitable engagement of multiple stakeholders in guideline development and implementation. METHODS: This will be a multi-stage project. The first stage is to conduct a series of four systematic reviews. These will (1) describe existing guidance and methods for stakeholder engagement in guideline development and implementation, (2) characterize barriers and facilitators to stakeholder engagement in guideline development and implementation, (3) explore the impact of stakeholder engagement on guideline development and implementation, and (4) identify issues related to conflicts of interest when engaging multiple stakeholders in guideline development and implementation. DISCUSSION: We will collaborate with our multiple and diverse stakeholders to develop guidance for multi-stakeholder engagement in guideline development and implementation. We will use the results of the systematic reviews to develop a candidate list of draft guidance recommendations and will seek broad feedback on the draft guidance via an online survey of guideline developers and external stakeholders. An invited group of representatives from all stakeholder groups will discuss the results of the survey at a consensus meeting which will inform the development of the final guidance papers. Our overall goal is to improve the development of guidelines through meaningful and equitable multi-stakeholder engagement, and subsequently to improve health outcomes and reduce inequities in health

Immigrant women’s and families’ views and experiences of routine postnatal care: findings from a qualitative evidence synthesis

Background: Uptake of postnatal care (PNC) is low and inequitable in many countries, and immigrant women may experience additional challenges to access and effective use. As part of a larger study examining the views of women, partners, and families on routine PNC, we analysed a subset of data on the specific experiences of immigrant women and families. Methods: This is a subanalysis of a larger qualitative evidence synthesis. We searched MEDLINE, PUBMED, CINAHL, EMBASE, EBM-Reviews and grey literature for studies published until December 2019 with extractable qualitative data with no language restrictions. For this analysis, we focused on papers related to immigrant women and families. Two reviewers screened each study independently; inclusion was agreed by consensus. Data abstraction and quality assessment were carried out using a study-specific extraction form and established quality assessment tools. Study findings were identified using thematic analysis. Findings are presented by confidence in the finding, applying the GRADE-CERQual approach. Findings: We included 44 papers, out of 602 full-texts, representing 11 countries where women and families sought PNC after immigrating. All but one included immigrants to high-income countries. Four themes were identified: resources and access, differences from home country, support needs, and experiences of care. High confidence study findings included: language and communication challenges; uncertainty about navigating system supports including transportation; high mental health, emotional, and informational needs; the impact of personal resources and social support; and the quality of interaction with healthcare providers. These findings highlight the importance of care experiences beyond clinical care. More research is also needed on the experiences of families migrating between low-income countries. Conclusions: Immigrant families experience many challenges in getting routine PNC, especially related to language, culture, and communication. Some challenges may be mitigated by improving comprehensive and accessible information on available services, as well as holistic social support. Trial registration number: CRD42019139183

Advancing the field of health systems research synthesis.

Those planning, managing and working in health systems worldwide routinely need to make decisions regarding strategies to improve health care and promote equity. Systematic reviews of different kinds can be of great help to these decision-makers, providing actionable evidence at every step in the decision-making process. Although there is growing recognition of the importance of systematic reviews to inform both policy decisions and produce guidance for health systems, a number of important methodological and evidence uptake challenges remain and better coordination of existing initiatives is needed. The Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research, housed within the World Health Organization, convened an Advisory Group on Health Systems Research (HSR) Synthesis to bring together different stakeholders interested in HSR synthesis and its use in decision-making processes. We describe the rationale of the Advisory Group and the six areas of its work and reflects on its role in advancing the field of HSR synthesis. We argue in favour of greater cross-institutional collaborations, as well as capacity strengthening in low- and middle-income countries, to advance the science and practice of health systems research synthesis. We advocate for the integration of quasi-experimental study designs in reviews of effectiveness of health systems intervention and reforms. The Advisory Group also recommends adopting priority-setting approaches for HSR synthesis and increasing the use of findings from systematic reviews in health policy and decision-making

Global evidence of gender equity in academic health research: a scoping review

Objectives: To chart the global literature on gender equity in academic health research. Design: Scoping review. Participants: Quantitative studies were eligible if they examined gender equity within academic institutions including health researchers. Primary and secondary outcome measures: Outcomes related to equity across gender and other social identities in academia: (1) faculty workforce: representation of all genders in university/faculty departments, academic rank or position and salary; (2) service: teaching obligations and administrative/non-teaching activities; (3) recruitment and hiring data: number of applicants by gender, interviews and new hires for various rank; (4) promotion: opportunities for promotion and time to progress through academic ranks; (5) academic leadership: type of leadership positions, opportunities for leadership promotion or training, opportunities to supervise/mentor and support for leadership bids; (6) scholarly output or productivity: number/type of publications and presentations, position of authorship, number/value of grants or awards and intellectual property ownership; (7) contextual factors of universities; (8) infrastructure; (9) knowledge and technology translation activities; (10) availability of maternity/paternity/parental/family leave; (11) collaboration activities/opportunities for collaboration; (12) qualitative considerations: perceptions around promotion, finances and support. Results: Literature search yielded 94 798 citations; 4753 full-text articles were screened, and 562 studies were included. Most studies originated from North America (462/562, 82.2%). Few studies (27/562, 4.8%) reported race and fewer reported sex/gender (which were used interchangeably in most studies) other than male/female (11/562, 2.0%). Only one study provided data on religion. No other PROGRESS-PLUS variables were reported. A total of 2996 outcomes were reported, with most studies examining academic output (371/562, 66.0%). Conclusions: Reviewed literature suggest a lack in analytic approaches that consider genders beyond the binary categories of man and woman, additional social identities (race, religion, social capital and disability) and an intersectionality lens examining the interconnection of multiple social identities in understanding discrimination and disadvantage. All of these are necessary to tailor strategies that promote gender equity. Trial registration number: Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/8wk7e/

PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) : Checklist and Explanation

Scoping reviews, a type of knowledge synthesis, follow a systematic approach to map evidence on a topic and identify main concepts, theories, sources, and knowledge gaps. Although more scoping reviews are being done, their methodological and reporting quality need improvement. This document presents the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist and explanation. The checklist was developed by a 24-member expert panel and 2 research leads following published guidance from the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network. The final checklist contains 20 essential reporting items and 2 optional items. The authors provide a rationale and an example of good reporting for each item. The intent of the PRISMA-ScR is to help readers (including researchers, publishers, commissioners, policymakers, health care providers, guideline developers, and patients or consumers) develop a greater understanding of relevant terminology, core concepts, and key items to report for scoping reviews