Research evidence communication for policy-makers: a rapid scoping review on frameworks, guidance and tools, and barriers and facilitators.

Background: Communication is a multifaceted process, ranging from linear, one-way approaches, such as transmitting a simple message, to continuous exchanges and feedback loops among stakeholders. In particular the COVID-19 pandemic underscored the critical need for timely, effective and credible evidence communication to increase awareness, levels of trust, and evidence uptake in policy and practice. However, whether to improve policy responses in crises or address more commonplace societal challenges, comprehensive guidance on evidence communication to decision-makers in health policies and systems remains limited.

National strategies for knowledge translation in health policy-making: A scoping review of grey literature.

Background And Objectives: Without strategic actions in its support, the translation of scientific research evidence into health policy is often absent or delayed. This review systematically maps and assesses national-level strategic documents in the field of knowledge translation (KT) for health policy, and develops a practical template that can support Evidence-informed Policy Network (EVIPNet) Europe countries in producing national strategies for evidence-informed policy-making.

Methods: Websites of organizations with strategic responsibilities in KT were electronically searched, on the basis of pre-defined criteria, in July-August 2017, and an updated search was carried out in April-June 2021.

Routinizing the Use of Evidence in Policy - What Is Needed? Comment on "Sustaining Knowledge Translation Practices: A Critical Interpretive Synthesis".

In their study of sustaining knowledge translation (KT) practices, Borst et al found that this process is an interplay of: () constructing and extending networks, () creating contexts that support KT practices, and () understanding how actors create, maintain, and disrupt institutions. Their article is an important contribution to the body of research promoting KT. In this commentary we reflect on the convergences and differences between the concepts of 'sustaining' and 'institutionalizing' KT, highlighting domains and processes related to the institutionalization, providing an analysis of KT landscape in Brazil and making a case for the need to increase countries' routine use of evidence.

Identifying priority questions regarding rapid systematic reviews' methods: protocol for an eDelphi study.

Introduction: Rapid systematic reviews (RRs) have the potential to provide timely information to decision-makers, thus directly impacting healthcare. However, consensus regarding the most efficient approaches to performing RRs and the presence of several unaddressed methodological issues pose challenges. With such a large potential research agenda for RRs, it is unclear what should be prioritised.

Key issues for stakeholder engagement in the development of health and healthcare guidelines.

Established in 2015, the Multi-Stakeholder Engagement (MuSE) Consortium is an international network of over 120 individuals interested in stakeholder engagement in research and guidelines. The MuSE group is developing guidance for stakeholder engagement in the development of health and healthcare guideline development. The development of this guidance has included multiple meetings with stakeholders, including patients, payers/purchasers of health services, peer review editors, policymakers, program managers, providers, principal investigators, product makers, the public, and purchasers of health services and has identified a number of key issues.

Integration of evidence into Theory of Change frameworks in the healthcare sector: A rapid systematic review.

Background: Theory of Change (ToC) has become an established approach to design and evaluate interventions. While ToC should-in line with the growing international focus on evidence-informed health decision-making-consider explicit approaches to incorporate evidence, there is limited guidance on how this should be done. This rapid review aims to identify and synthesize the available literature on how to systematically use research evidence when developing or adapting ToCs in the health sector.

An ethical analysis of policy dialogues.

Background: A policy dialogue is a tool which promotes evidence-informed policy-making. It involves deliberation about a high-priority issue, informed by a synthesis of the best-available evidence, where potential policy interventions are discussed by stakeholders. We offer an ethical analysis of policy dialogues - an argument about how policy dialogues ought to be conceived and executed - to guide those organizing and participating in policy dialogues.

An evaluation of the evidence brief for policy development process in WHO EVIPNet Europe countries.

Background: Evidence briefs for policy (EBPs) represent a potentially powerful tool for supporting evidence-informed policy-making. Since 2012, WHO Evidence-Informed Policy Network (EVIPNet) Europe has been supporting Member States in developing EBPs. The aim of this study was to evaluate the process of developing EBPs in Estonia, Hungary and Slovenia.

The ecosystem of health decision making: from fragmentation to synergy.

Clinicians, patients, policy makers, funders, programme managers, regulators, and science communities invest considerable amounts of time and energy in influencing or making decisions at various levels, using systematic reviews, health technology assessments, guideline recommendations, coverage decisions, selection of essential medicines and diagnostics, quality assurance and improvement schemes, and policy and evidence briefs. The criteria and methods that these actors use in their work differ (eg, the role economic analysis has in decision making), but these methods frequently overlap and exist together. Under the aegis of WHO, we have brought together representatives of different areas to reconcile how the evidence that influences decisions is used across multiple health system decision levels.

Domains and processes for institutionalizing evidence-informed health policy-making: a critical interpretive synthesis.

Background: While calls for institutionalization of evidence-informed policy-making (EIP) have become stronger in recent years, there is a paucity of methods that governments and organizational knowledge brokers can use to sustain and integrate EIP as part of mainstream health policy-making. The objective of this paper was to conduct a knowledge synthesis of the published and grey literatures to develop a theoretical framework with the key features of EIP institutionalization.

Methods: We applied a critical interpretive synthesis (CIS) that allowed for a systematic, yet iterative and dynamic analysis of heterogeneous bodies of literature to develop an explanatory framework for EIP institutionalization.

A comprehensive monitoring and evaluation framework for evidence to policy networks.

Objective: To describe the development of a framework for monitoring and evaluating knowledge translation (KT) networks.

Method: The framework was developed using mixed methods over four phases, including i) a targeted literature review of KT networks, activities and indicators, ii) two scoping reviews to further enhance the set of indicators, iii) peer-reviews by international KT experts and an online expert consultation, and iv) piloting.

Results: A comprehensive theory of change (ToC) and indicators, both for the Network Secretariat and its participating member countries, were identified to develop the monitoring and evaluation framework.

Factors to Consider During Identification and Invitation of Individuals in a Multi-stakeholder Research Partnership.

Background: Health research teams increasingly partner with stakeholders to produce research that is relevant, accessible, and widely used. Previous work has covered stakeholder group identification.

Objective: We aimed to develop factors for health research teams to consider during identification and invitation of individual representatives in a multi-stakeholder research partnership, with the aim of forming equitable and informed teams.

Integrating citizen engagement into evidence-informed health policy-making in eastern Europe and central Asia: scoping study and future research priorities.

Background: The perspectives of citizens are an important and often overlooked source of evidence for informing health policy. Despite growing encouragement for its adoption, little is known regarding how citizen engagement may be integrated into evidence-informed health policy-making in low- and middle-income counties (LMICs) and newly democratic states (NDSs). We aimed to identify the factors and variables affecting the potential integration of citizen engagement into evidence-informed health policy-making in LMICs and NDSs and understand whether its implementation may require a different approach outside of high-income western democracies.

What do we know about evidence-informed priority setting processes to set population-level health-research agendas: an overview of reviews.

Background: This overview aimed to synthesize existing systematic reviews to produce a draft framework of evidence-informed health priority setting that supports countries in identifying appropriate steps and methods when developing and implementing national research agendas.

Main Body: We searched Ovid MEDLINE and the WHO Institutional Repository for Information Sharing from 2010 to 2020 for critical or systematic reviews that evaluated research priority setting exercises. We adapted the AMSTAR checklist to assess the quality of included reviews and used adapted frameworks for data extraction and analysis.

Assessing the impact of knowledge communication and dissemination strategies targeted at health policy-makers and managers: an overview of systematic reviews.

Background: The use of research evidence as an input for health decision-making is a need for most health systems. There are a number of approaches for promoting evidence use at different levels of the health system, but knowledge of their effectiveness is still scarce. The objective of this overview was to evaluate the effectiveness of knowledge communication and dissemination interventions, strategies or approaches targeting policy-makers and health managers.

Translating health information into policy-making: A pragmatic framework.

Knowledge translation (KT) is increasingly acknowledged to have the potential to improve policy-making. The value of health information (HI), as part of the KT context, is now also increasingly understood. This paper aims to identify existing tools for the translation of HI into policy-making and to develop a related framework facilitating future application of these identified tools.