Assessing the capacity of ministries of health to use research in decision-making: conceptual framework and tool

Clicks: 471
ID: 111933
2017
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #6 of 63 articles by views in health research policy and systems

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
The capacity to demand and use research is critical for governments if they are to develop policies that are informed by evidence. Existing tools designed to assess how government officials use evidence in decision-making have significant limitations for low- and middle-income countries (LMICs); they are rarely tested in LMICs and focus only on individual capacity. This paper introduces an instrument that was developed to assess Ministry of Health (MoH) capacity to demand and use research evidence for decision-making, which was tested for reliability and validity in eight LMICs (Bangladesh, Fiji, India, Lebanon, Moldova, Pakistan, South Africa, Zambia). Instrument development was based on a new conceptual framework that addresses individual, organisational and systems capacities, and items were drawn from existing instruments and a literature review. After initial item development and pre-testing to address face validity and item phrasing, the instrument was reduced to 54 items for further validation and item reduction. In-country study teams interviewed a systematic sample of 203 MoH officials. Exploratory factor analysis was used in addition to standard reliability and validity measures to further assess the items. Thirty items divided between two factors representing organisational and individual capacity constructs were identified. South Africa and Zambia demonstrated the highest level of organisational capacity to use research, whereas Pakistan and Bangladesh were the lowest two. In contrast, individual capacity was highest in Pakistan, followed by South Africa, whereas Bangladesh and Lebanon were the lowest. The framework and related instrument represent a new opportunity for MoHs to identify ways to understand and improve capacities to incorporate research evidence in decision-making, as well as to provide a basis for tracking change.
Reference Key
rodríguez2017healthassessing Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Daniela C. Rodríguez;Connie Hoe;Elina M. Dale;M. Hafizur Rahman;Sadika Akhter;Assad Hafeez;Wayne Irava;Preety Rajbangshi;Tamlyn Roman;Marcela Ţîrdea;Rouham Yamout;David H. Peters;Daniela C. Rodríguez;Connie Hoe;Elina M. Dale;M. Hafizur Rahman;Sadika Akhter;Assad Hafeez;Wayne Irava;Preety Rajbangshi;Tamlyn Roman;Marcela Ţîrdea;Rouham Yamout;David H. Peters;
Journal health research policy and systems
Year 2017
DOI
doi:10.1186/s12961-017-0227-3
URL
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-017-0227-3
Keywords
public health health policy health services research health administration general medicine/public health r & d/technology policy

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.