Expanding access to sexual and reproductive health and rights through evidence-based policy dialogue: implications for practice from a multicountry initiative.

IF 6.1 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH BMJ Global Health Pub Date : 2025-04-02 DOI:10.1136/bmjgh-2024-016587
Ulrika Rehnstrom Loi, Amy Coates, Offeibea Obubah, Frank Noij, Katy Footman, Antonella Lavelanet, Hyobum Jang, Laurence Codjia, Laurence Läser, Tesfaye Tufa, Leopold Ouedraogo, Nilmini Hemachandra, Karima Gholbzouri, Meera Upadhyay, Neena Raina, Dina Gbenou, Souleymane Zan, Thierry Tossou Boco, Theopista John Kabuteni, Maria Mugabo Mujawamariya, Priya Karna, Ram Chahar, Amrita Kansal, Ellen Thom, Qudsia Uzma, Dan Kass, Carisse Hamlet, Adam Karpati, Shambhu Acharya, Bela Ganatra
{"title":"Expanding access to sexual and reproductive health and rights through evidence-based policy dialogue: implications for practice from a multicountry initiative.","authors":"Ulrika Rehnstrom Loi, Amy Coates, Offeibea Obubah, Frank Noij, Katy Footman, Antonella Lavelanet, Hyobum Jang, Laurence Codjia, Laurence Läser, Tesfaye Tufa, Leopold Ouedraogo, Nilmini Hemachandra, Karima Gholbzouri, Meera Upadhyay, Neena Raina, Dina Gbenou, Souleymane Zan, Thierry Tossou Boco, Theopista John Kabuteni, Maria Mugabo Mujawamariya, Priya Karna, Ram Chahar, Amrita Kansal, Ellen Thom, Qudsia Uzma, Dan Kass, Carisse Hamlet, Adam Karpati, Shambhu Acharya, Bela Ganatra","doi":"10.1136/bmjgh-2024-016587","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Policy dialogue is an important component of evidence-based policy-making. In 2019, WHO and Ministry of Health staff in 15 countries participated in an initiative that involved training and implementation of country-level sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) policy dialogues. An evaluation of the process and outcomes was subsequently undertaken in six of the countries.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The three-stage policy dialogue initiative included a preparatory phase to develop stakeholder analyses and policy briefs and a 2-day workshop to develop an action plan, followed by continuous support as the national teams implemented the action plans. A participatory, multimethod approach was used to evaluate the policy dialogue initiative, including a desk review of initiative documentation and interviews with project participants.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants reported positive experiences of the policy dialogue initiative and felt it improved their knowledge, skills and confidence. The ensuing policy dialogue activities in each country contributed to some SRHR policy development and/or implementation changes. The policy dialogue initiative supported these changes through its practical approach to learning and ongoing technical support. However, the impact of policy dialogues varied depending on political factors, the scope of policy goals, alignment with existing country priorities and stakeholder engagement. Furthermore, facilitating factors included strong support networks, incremental working and preparation for backlash against SRHR.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our experience highlights the value of policy dialogue for progressing SRHR policy change at the national level and the need for further investments in strengthening the skills of health decision-makers required for effective policy dialogue.</p>","PeriodicalId":9137,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Global Health","volume":"8 Suppl 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12164306/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2024-016587","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Policy dialogue is an important component of evidence-based policy-making. In 2019, WHO and Ministry of Health staff in 15 countries participated in an initiative that involved training and implementation of country-level sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) policy dialogues. An evaluation of the process and outcomes was subsequently undertaken in six of the countries.

Methods: The three-stage policy dialogue initiative included a preparatory phase to develop stakeholder analyses and policy briefs and a 2-day workshop to develop an action plan, followed by continuous support as the national teams implemented the action plans. A participatory, multimethod approach was used to evaluate the policy dialogue initiative, including a desk review of initiative documentation and interviews with project participants.

Results: Participants reported positive experiences of the policy dialogue initiative and felt it improved their knowledge, skills and confidence. The ensuing policy dialogue activities in each country contributed to some SRHR policy development and/or implementation changes. The policy dialogue initiative supported these changes through its practical approach to learning and ongoing technical support. However, the impact of policy dialogues varied depending on political factors, the scope of policy goals, alignment with existing country priorities and stakeholder engagement. Furthermore, facilitating factors included strong support networks, incremental working and preparation for backlash against SRHR.

Conclusions: Our experience highlights the value of policy dialogue for progressing SRHR policy change at the national level and the need for further investments in strengthening the skills of health decision-makers required for effective policy dialogue.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
通过循证政策对话扩大获得性健康和生殖健康及权利的机会:多国倡议对实践的影响。
政策对话是循证决策的重要组成部分。2019年,世卫组织和15个国家的卫生部工作人员参加了一项倡议,该倡议涉及培训和实施国家级性健康和生殖健康及权利政策对话。随后在其中六个国家对这一进程和结果进行了评价。方法:政策对话计划分为三个阶段,包括一个准备阶段,制定利益相关者分析和政策简报,以及一个为期两天的研讨会,制定行动计划,随后在国家团队实施行动计划时提供持续支持。采用了一种参与性的多方法方法来评价政策对话倡议,包括对倡议文件的案头审查和对项目参与者的访谈。结果:与会者报告了政策对话倡议的积极经验,并认为这提高了他们的知识、技能和信心。随后在每个国家开展的政策对话活动促进了一些性别和人力资源政策的制定和/或执行变化。政策对话倡议通过其实际的学习方法和持续的技术支助来支持这些变化。然而,政策对话的影响因政治因素、政策目标的范围、与现有国家优先事项的一致性以及利益攸关方的参与而异。此外,促进因素包括强大的支持网络、渐进式工作和对性别歧视的反弹做好准备。结论:我们的经验突出了政策对话对于在国家一级推进性健康和生殖健康政策变革的价值,以及进一步投资加强有效政策对话所需的卫生决策者技能的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMJ Global Health
BMJ Global Health Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
11.40
自引率
4.90%
发文量
429
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊介绍: BMJ Global Health is an online Open Access journal from BMJ that focuses on publishing high-quality peer-reviewed content pertinent to individuals engaged in global health, including policy makers, funders, researchers, clinicians, and frontline healthcare workers. The journal encompasses all facets of global health, with a special emphasis on submissions addressing underfunded areas such as non-communicable diseases (NCDs). It welcomes research across all study phases and designs, from study protocols to phase I trials to meta-analyses, including small or specialized studies. The journal also encourages opinionated discussions on controversial topics.
期刊最新文献
The effect of deploying non-physician anaesthesia providers on surgical access and capacity across Nepal's primary and secondary government hospitals: a quasi-experimental mixed methods study. Cost-saving strategies for sustainable surgical care: a scoping review of efficiency models and potential approaches for low-income and middle-income countries. Pathways to care and service preferences, and experiences of women who self-manage abortion through community pharmacies in two counties of Kenya. Assessing the impact of the Taliban takeover on accessibility, availability, acceptability and quality of public healthcare facilities in Afghanistan: a mixed methods study. Lessons learnt from the COVID-19 pandemic: Middle East and North Africa regional perspective for future preparedness.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1