Improving Utility of Evidence Synthesis for Healthy Public Policy

The Three Rs (Relevance, Rigor, and Readability [and Resources])

Dados Bibliográficos

ID11018154
AutoresHilary Thomson (0000-0002-6810-9948, Hilary Thomson is with the MRC/CSO Social & Public Health Science Unit, Glasgow, United Kingdom., autor correspondente)
Ano2013
Volume103
Fascículo8
Páginase17-e23
Data de publicação2013-08-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessNão
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoAmerican Journal of Public Health (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 0090-0036 • E-ISSN: 1541-0048
EditoraAmerican Public Health Association (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.2105/ajph.2013.301400
PMID23763400
PMCIDPMC4007892
OpenAlexW2097638044
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas5
Referências citadas35

Systematic reviews have the potential to promote knowledge exchange between researchers and decision-makers. Review planning requires engagement with evidence users to ensure preparation of relevant reviews, and well-conducted reviews should provide accessible and reliable synthesis to support decision-making. Yet, systematic reviews are not routinely referred to by decision-makers, and innovative approaches to improve the utility of reviews is needed. Evidence synthesis for healthy public policy is typically complex and methodologically challenging. Although not lessening the value of reviews, these challenges can be overwhelming and threaten their utility. Using the interrelated principles of relevance, rigor, and readability, and in light of available resources, this article considers how utility of evidence synthesis for healthy public policy might be improved

Alternative medicine · Economics · Evidence-based medicine · Evidence-based policy · Evidence-based practice · Management science · MEDLINE · Political science · Public health · Public relations · Readability · Relevance (law) · Systematic review · Climate Change and Health Impacts · Computer Science · Health Policy Implementation Science · Medicine · Meta-analysis and systematic reviews