喀土穆联邦卫生部政策制定者和证据产生者在政策制定中使用证据

A. Mohamed, Zeinab Ibrahim Swar Eldahab, L. Karlsson, H. Abusalih
{"title":"喀土穆联邦卫生部政策制定者和证据产生者在政策制定中使用证据","authors":"A. Mohamed, Zeinab Ibrahim Swar Eldahab, L. Karlsson, H. Abusalih","doi":"10.5455/ijhrs.0000000179","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Evidence informed policy is defined as an approach to decisions that ensure that decision making is informed by the best available research evidence. Evidence has a great impact on policy development and implementation especially in countries with scarce resources. Health systems research- evidence is not always communicated effectively or in a timely manner. \nPurpose: The Aim of this study is to explore the use of evidence in policy development among directors of the Federal Ministry of Health (FMoH) and the factors affecting evidence-generating bodies in Khartoum, Sudan 2016. \nMaterials and Methods: This is a descriptive qualitative exploratory study involving two groups: Decision makers who were the heads of the directorates involved in policy development and evidence generating bodies: the Public Health Institute, Sudan Health Observatory and the Institute of Endemic Diseases. Using purposive sampling of 17 personnel, in depth interviews were conducted. Data analysis was done through thematic framework analysis combined with the deductive approach. \nResults: Knowledge, attitude and skills of the policy makers interviewed showed that all the interviewees had good knowledge and positive attitudes towards evidence even though obstacles, such as intervention from higher authorities, faced some decisions. This study identified many sources of evidence, such as research, reports, surveys, key informants, experts and stakeholders’ consensus; but obstacles arise when evidence is not timely available. Most of respondents generated evidence themselves and most departments collaborated with each other and with other entities to get evidence. However, working with others depended on personal relationship, otherwise the decision making process would be a lengthy process. \nIt was noted that local universities had no big role in generating evidence. There is no evidence generated by the Research department in FMoH, and the respondents pointed out that there are many obstacles regarding the implementation of the policy, such as high turnover of the staff, lack of skilled staff and unavailability of funds \nConclusions: There is a positive attitude towards the concept of evidence among decision makers. Many factors affect the use of evidence in policy and decision making in general. Joint mechanism should be developed to allow for the flow down of evidence between local researchers and universities and decision makers.","PeriodicalId":399159,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences (IJHRS)","volume":"94 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Use of Evidence in Policy Development by Policy Makers and Evidence Generators at the Federal Ministry of Health, Khartoum - Sudan\",\"authors\":\"A. Mohamed, Zeinab Ibrahim Swar Eldahab, L. Karlsson, H. Abusalih\",\"doi\":\"10.5455/ijhrs.0000000179\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Evidence informed policy is defined as an approach to decisions that ensure that decision making is informed by the best available research evidence. Evidence has a great impact on policy development and implementation especially in countries with scarce resources. Health systems research- evidence is not always communicated effectively or in a timely manner. \\nPurpose: The Aim of this study is to explore the use of evidence in policy development among directors of the Federal Ministry of Health (FMoH) and the factors affecting evidence-generating bodies in Khartoum, Sudan 2016. \\nMaterials and Methods: This is a descriptive qualitative exploratory study involving two groups: Decision makers who were the heads of the directorates involved in policy development and evidence generating bodies: the Public Health Institute, Sudan Health Observatory and the Institute of Endemic Diseases. Using purposive sampling of 17 personnel, in depth interviews were conducted. Data analysis was done through thematic framework analysis combined with the deductive approach. \\nResults: Knowledge, attitude and skills of the policy makers interviewed showed that all the interviewees had good knowledge and positive attitudes towards evidence even though obstacles, such as intervention from higher authorities, faced some decisions. This study identified many sources of evidence, such as research, reports, surveys, key informants, experts and stakeholders’ consensus; but obstacles arise when evidence is not timely available. Most of respondents generated evidence themselves and most departments collaborated with each other and with other entities to get evidence. However, working with others depended on personal relationship, otherwise the decision making process would be a lengthy process. \\nIt was noted that local universities had no big role in generating evidence. There is no evidence generated by the Research department in FMoH, and the respondents pointed out that there are many obstacles regarding the implementation of the policy, such as high turnover of the staff, lack of skilled staff and unavailability of funds \\nConclusions: There is a positive attitude towards the concept of evidence among decision makers. Many factors affect the use of evidence in policy and decision making in general. Joint mechanism should be developed to allow for the flow down of evidence between local researchers and universities and decision makers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":399159,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences (IJHRS)\",\"volume\":\"94 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences (IJHRS)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5455/ijhrs.0000000179\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences (IJHRS)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5455/ijhrs.0000000179","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:循证政策被定义为确保决策依据现有最佳研究证据的决策方法。证据对政策制定和实施有很大影响,特别是在资源匮乏的国家。卫生系统研究——证据并不总是得到有效或及时的传播。目的:本研究的目的是探讨2016年苏丹喀土穆联邦卫生部(FMoH)主任在政策制定中使用证据的情况,以及影响证据产生机构的因素。材料和方法:这是一项描述性质的探索性研究,涉及两组:决策者,他们是参与政策制定和证据产生机构的主管:公共卫生研究所、苏丹卫生观察站和地方病研究所。采用有目的的抽样,对17名人员进行了深度访谈。数据分析采用主题框架分析与演绎法相结合的方法。结果:受访决策者的知识、态度和技能显示,尽管面临一些决策障碍,如上级干预,但所有受访者对证据都有良好的知识和积极的态度。本研究确定了许多证据来源,如研究、报告、调查、关键线人、专家和利益相关者达成的共识;但是,如果不能及时获得证据,就会出现障碍。大多数答复者自己提供证据,大多数部门相互合作或与其他实体合作以获取证据。然而,与他人合作取决于个人关系,否则决策过程将是一个漫长的过程。有人指出,地方大学在提供证据方面没有多大作用。FMoH的研究部门没有产生证据,受访者指出政策的实施存在许多障碍,如人员流动率高,缺乏熟练的人员和资金不足。结论:决策者对证据的概念持积极态度。一般来说,许多因素影响政策和决策中证据的使用。应该建立联合机制,让证据在当地研究人员、大学和决策者之间流动。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Use of Evidence in Policy Development by Policy Makers and Evidence Generators at the Federal Ministry of Health, Khartoum - Sudan
Background: Evidence informed policy is defined as an approach to decisions that ensure that decision making is informed by the best available research evidence. Evidence has a great impact on policy development and implementation especially in countries with scarce resources. Health systems research- evidence is not always communicated effectively or in a timely manner. Purpose: The Aim of this study is to explore the use of evidence in policy development among directors of the Federal Ministry of Health (FMoH) and the factors affecting evidence-generating bodies in Khartoum, Sudan 2016. Materials and Methods: This is a descriptive qualitative exploratory study involving two groups: Decision makers who were the heads of the directorates involved in policy development and evidence generating bodies: the Public Health Institute, Sudan Health Observatory and the Institute of Endemic Diseases. Using purposive sampling of 17 personnel, in depth interviews were conducted. Data analysis was done through thematic framework analysis combined with the deductive approach. Results: Knowledge, attitude and skills of the policy makers interviewed showed that all the interviewees had good knowledge and positive attitudes towards evidence even though obstacles, such as intervention from higher authorities, faced some decisions. This study identified many sources of evidence, such as research, reports, surveys, key informants, experts and stakeholders’ consensus; but obstacles arise when evidence is not timely available. Most of respondents generated evidence themselves and most departments collaborated with each other and with other entities to get evidence. However, working with others depended on personal relationship, otherwise the decision making process would be a lengthy process. It was noted that local universities had no big role in generating evidence. There is no evidence generated by the Research department in FMoH, and the respondents pointed out that there are many obstacles regarding the implementation of the policy, such as high turnover of the staff, lack of skilled staff and unavailability of funds Conclusions: There is a positive attitude towards the concept of evidence among decision makers. Many factors affect the use of evidence in policy and decision making in general. Joint mechanism should be developed to allow for the flow down of evidence between local researchers and universities and decision makers.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Use of Evidence in Policy Development by Policy Makers and Evidence Generators at the Federal Ministry of Health, Khartoum - Sudan Improvement in Cervical Range of Motion After Thrust and Grade Iii Maitland Mobilization of Thoracic Spine in Patients with Postural Neck Pain -A randomized controlled trail The Protective Role Social Support Plays in Determining Adolescent Mental Health Outcomes Professional Issues in Physical Therapy Fields: Core Values and Expert's Critical Analysis Total Assessment-Reassessment and Evaluation using bioKinesiologic (TAREK) approach for severe chronic long lasting head injury
×
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:481959085
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