A more interdisciplinary approach can help us understand why research evidence does or doesn’t make it into policy

Effective communication of research is often cited as being most important to gaining the attention of policymakers. This arguably underestimates the sheer complexity of the policymaking process, assuming a linear route from evidence to policy and practice. Fiona Blyth and Carmen Huckel Schneider explain why breaking down walls between different academic disciplines could enhance our understanding of why research evidence does − or doesn’t − make it into policy, and also suggest questions that researchers might ask as a “gateway” to understanding these different approaches to evidence-informed policymaking

Implementing system-wide risk stratification approaches: a review of critical success and failure factors

An Evidence Check rapid review brokered by the Sax Institute for the NSW Agency for Clinical Innovatio

Conceptualizing oral health care systems for comparative analysis – public, private and statutory

The Global Burden of Disease Study 2010 put the worldwide figure at 15 million disability adjusted life years due to oral health disorders considerably varying across countries. Epidemiological factors like Socio-demographics, diets, age and oral hygiene habits are known for the most common oral diseases. However, little is known about the health system factors and its influence on oral health outcomes. Whilst there is ample evidence on comparative health system functioning and its outcome, the oral health tributary of it needs to be reveale

Evaluation of Project ECHO (Persistent Pain)

Western Victoria Primary Health Network (WVPHN) in partnership with the Transport Accident Commission (TAC) and WorkSafe Victoria (‘WorkSafe’) implemented Project ECHO (Persistent Pain) Series 1 in February-June 2020 and Series 2 in July-December 2020. The Menzies Centre for Health Policy and Economics, University of Sydney was commissioned by WVPHN to undertake the evaluation of Project ECHO (Persistent Pain) Series 2

Moving from silos to synergies:Strengthening governance of food marketing policy in Thailand

BACKGROUND: Governance processes play an important role in shaping the formulation and implementation of policy measures such as restrictions on marketing of ultra-processed foods. However, there is limited analysis of the factors that affect governance for nutrition, especially in low- and middle-income countries such as Thailand and the Southeast Asia region. This study aimed to examine governance factors that create opportunities and challenges for the introduction of policy to restrict food marketing in Thailand, in line with the WHO recommendations to restrict food marketing to children. METHODS: A qualitative study design was used. Interviews were conducted with 20 actors with experience and in depth knowledge of food marketing in Thailand, including government, civil society, industry and international organisations. Open questions were asked about experiences and perceptions of the governance processes related to policies for restricting food marketing in Thailand. Themes were derived from the 3-i Framework which relates to interests, ideas and institutions influencing the introduction of food marketing policy were identified and analysed using abductive methods. RESULTS: Actors viewed institutional challenges as a significant barrier to advancing effective regulation of food marketing. Three major clusters emerged from the data: interests (priorities, relationships), institutions (formal structures, informal structures, broader institutional strategies), and ideas (norms). The study has three major findings in relation to these factors, highlighting the influence of formal structures, institutional interests in food marketing issues, and ideas in promoting multisectoralism. The siloed nature of policymaking was reflected in the government failing to stimulate engagement among key actors, posing challenges for implementation of effective policy change. Contested interests led to disagreements between actors over food marketing agenda and thus competing policy priorities. Consistent with these findings, the lack of effective mechanisms to promote multisectoral coordination across diverse actors reinforced barriers to policy change. CONCLUSION: The findings highlight ongoing challenges to the government’s aim to strengthen policy to restrict food marketing which, without greater coordination in governance mechanisms, will hinder effective regulation and the achievement of public health goals. This analysis suggests that the Government should prioritise the development of a holistic, multisectoral approach to improve governance for better nutrition outcomes by overcoming policy silos

Inhibitors and supporters of policy change in the regulation of unhealthy food marketing in Australia

Background: Evidence on the impact of policies that regulate unhealthy food marketing demonstrates a need for a shift from pure industry self-regulation toward statutory regulation. Institutional rules, decision-making procedures, actor practices, and institutional norms influence the regulatory choices made by policy-makers. This study examined institutional processes that sustain, support, or inhibit change in the food marketing regulation in Australia using the three pillars of institutions framework – regulatory, normative, and cultural cognitive pillars. Methods: This was a qualitative study. Twenty-four in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with industry, government, civil society, and academic actors who are involved in nutrition policy in Australia. Results: The regulatory pillar was perceived to inhibit policy change through the co-regulation and self-regulation frameworks that assign rulemaking, monitoring and enforcement to industry bodies with minimal oversight by regulatory agencies and no involvement of health actors. The normative pillar was perceived to provide pathways for comprehensive statutory regulation through institutional goals and norms for collaboration that centre on a whole-of-government approach. The framing of food marketing policies to highlight the vulnerability of children is a cultural cognitive element that was perceived to be essential for getting support for policy change; however, there was a lack of shared understanding of food marketing as a policy issue. In addition, government ideologies that are perceived to be reluctant to regulate commercial actors and values that prioritize economic interest over public health make it difficult for health advocates to argue for statutory regulation of food marketing. Conclusion: Elements of all three pillars (regulatory, normative, and cultural-cognitive) were identified as either inhibitors or pathways that support policy change. This study contributes to the understanding of factors that inhibit policy change and potential pathways for implementing comprehensive statutory regulation of unhealthy food marketing.</p

Protecting children from unhealthy food marketing:A comparative policy analysis in Australia, Fiji and Thailand

Restrictions on marketing of unhealthy foods and beverages to children is a globally recommended policy measure to improve diets and health. The aim of the analysis was to identify opportunities to enable policy learning and shift beliefs of relevant actors, to engender policy progress on restrictions on marketing of unhealthy foods to children. We drew on the Advocacy Coalition Framework to thematically analyse data from qualitative policy interviews conducted Australia (n = 24), Fiji (n = 10) and Thailand (n = 20). In all three countries two clear and opposing advocacy coalitions were evident within the policy subsystem related to regulation of unhealthy food marketing, which we termed the 'strengthen regulation' and 'minimal/self regulation' coalitions. Contributors to policy stasis on this issue were identified as tensions between public health and economic objectives of government, and limited formal and informal spaces for productive dialogue. The analysis also identified opportunities for policy learning that could enable policy progress on restrictions on marketing of unhealthy foods to children as: taking an incremental approach to policy change, defining permitted (rather than restricted) foods, investing in new public health expertise related to emerging marketing approaches and scaling up of monitoring of impacts. The insights from this study are likely to be relevant to many countries seeking to strengthen regulation of marketing to children, in response to recent global recommendations.</p

From Local Action to Global Policy: A Comparative Policy Content Analysis of National Policies to Address Musculoskeletal Health to Inform Global Policy Development

Background: Global policy to guide action on musculoskeletal (MSK) health is in a nascent phase. Lagging behind other non-communicable diseases (NCDs) there is currently little global policy to assist governments to develop national approaches to MSK health. Considering the importance of comparison and learning for global policy development, we aimed to perform a comparative analysis of national MSK policies to identify areas of innovation and draw common themes and principles that could guide MSK health policy. Methods: Multi-modal search strategy incorporating a systematic online search targeted at the 30 most populated nations; a call to networked experts; a specified question in a related eDelphi questionnaire; and snowballing methods. Extracted data were organised using an a priori framework adapted from the World Health Organization (WHO) Building Blocks and further inductive coding. Subsequently, texts were open coded and thematically analysed to derive specific sub-themes and principles underlying texts within each theme, serving as abstracted, transferable concepts for future global policy. Results: The search yielded 165 documents with 41 retained after removal of duplicates and exclusions. Only three documents were comprehensive national strategies addressing MSK health. The most common conditions addressed in the documents were pain (non-cancer), low back pain, occupational health, inflammatory conditions, and osteoarthritis. Across eight categories, we derived 47 sub-themes with transferable principles that could guide global policy for: service delivery; workforce; medicines and technologies; financing; data and information systems; leadership and governance; citizens, consumers and communities; and research and innovation. Conclusion: There are few examples of national strategic policy to address MSK health; however, many countries are moving towards this by documenting the burden of disease and developing policies for MSK services. This review found a breadth of principles that can add to this existing work and may be adopted to develop comprehensive system-wide MSK health approaches at national and global levels

Context and Priorities for Health Systems Strengthening for Pain and Disability in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Secondary Qualitative Study and Content Analysis of Health Policies.

Musculoskeletal (MSK) health impairments contribute substantially to the pain and disability burden in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), yet health systems strengthening (HSS) responses are nascent in these settings. We aimed to explore the contemporary context, framed as challenges and opportunities, for improving population-level prevention and management of MSK health in LMICs using secondary qualitative data from a previous study exploring HSS priorities for MSK health globally and (2) to contextualize these findings through a primary analysis of health policies for integrated management of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) in select LMICs. Part 1: 12 transcripts of interviews with LMIC-based key informants (KIs) were inductively analysed. Part 2: systematic content analysis of health policies for integrated care of NCDs where KIs were resident (Argentina, Bangladesh, Brazil, Ethiopia, India, Kenya, Malaysia, Philippines and South Africa). A thematic framework of LMIC-relevant challenges and opportunities was empirically derived and organized around five meta-themes: (1) MSK health is a low priority; (2) social determinants adversely affect MSK health; (3) healthcare system issues de-prioritize MSK health; (4) economic constraints restrict system capacity to direct and mobilize resources to MSK health; and (5) build research capacity. Twelve policy documents were included, describing explicit foci on cardiovascular disease (100%), diabetes (100%), respiratory conditions (100%) and cancer (89%); none explicitly focused on MSK health. Policy strategies were coded into three categories: (1) general principles for people-centred NCD care, (2) service delivery and (3) system strengthening. Four policies described strategies to address MSK health in some way, mostly related to injury care. Priorities and opportunities for HSS for MSK health identified by KIs aligned with broader strategies targeting NCDs identified in the policies. MSK health is not currently prioritized in NCD health policies among selected LMICs. However, opportunities to address the MSK-attributed disability burden exist through integrating MSK-specific HSS initiatives with initiatives targeting NCDs generally and injury and trauma care