Literature DB >> 17116253

Best practices in use of research evidence to inform health decisions.

Judith A Whitworth.   

Abstract

The WHO Advisory Committee on Health Research (ACHR) is committed to the notion that WHO should exemplify best practice in use of research evidence to inform decisions about health. A major ongoing initiative of the ACHR is the Sub-committee on the Use of Research Evidence (SURE). This group is examining WHOs roles and responsibilities in the use of health research to inform decisions about health. WHOs leadership has expressed strong support for this initiative. The series of articles being published in Health Research Policy and Systems, which examine the methods used by WHO and other organisations to formulate recommendations about health, is part of the background documentation SURE has produced to inform ACHRs advice to WHO. It is critical that health policy makers look to research, not ignorance, as the basis for action in health, and that health professionals look to evidence, not opinion, as the basis for delivery of care.

Entities:  

Year:  2006        PMID: 17116253      PMCID: PMC1665444          DOI: 10.1186/1478-4505-4-11

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst        ISSN: 1478-4505


Editorial

WHO is unquestionably the world's leading public health agency. Accordingly its recommendations and actions should be informed by the best available research evidence. Over the last 50 years WHO has had notable successes, but the environment is changing. Increasingly governments, health professionals and consumers are demanding more rigorous processes to ensure that health decisions are well informed, with systematic and transparent processes for synthesis and interpretation of evidence, rather than traditional approaches using expert opinion. WHO has the mandate to capitalise on these advances and to play a leadership role with member states. The WHO Advisory Committee on Health Research (ACHR) is committed to the notion that WHO should exemplify best practice in use of research evidence to inform decisions about health. A major ongoing initiative of the ACHR is the Sub-committee on the Use of Research Evidence (SURE). This group is examining WHO's roles and responsibilities in the use of health research to inform decisions about health. WHO's leadership has expressed strong support for this initiative. The series of articles being published in Health Research Policy and Systems, which examine the methods used by WHO and other organisations to formulate recommendations about health, is part of the background documentation SURE has produced to inform ACHR's advice to WHO. ACHR looks forward to an ongoing role in promotion of best use of evidence in WHO's policies, recommendations and guidelines. These are essential for WHO to maintain its leadership role as the premier international health organisation in quality of advice based on best research evidence, consistent both with international best practice and WHO's key normative role as a standard setter. An article on EVIPNet in the Lancet recently pointed out that policy makers often see research as the opposite of action, rather than as the opposite of ignorance [1]. Only this week I heard a senior public health officer bemoan the fact that decision makers preferred policy-based evidence to evidence-based policy. Realistically, policy will be informed by, rather than based on, evidence, because so many other factors eg feasibility, equity, politics enter the equation. Similarly health professionals use evidence not in isolation, but in the context of individual patient characteristics and preferences. It is critical that health policy makers look to research, not ignorance, as the basis for action in health, and that health professionals look to evidence, not opinion, as the basis for delivery of care.
  1 in total

1.  EVIPNet: translating the spirit of Mexico.

Authors:  Maimunah Hamid; Thiel Bustamante-Manaog; Viet Dung Truong; Kongsap Akkhavong; Hongpeng Fu; Yuanxin Ma; Xinqui Zhong; Reijo Salmela; Ulysses Panisset; Tikki Pang
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2005-11-19       Impact factor: 79.321

  1 in total
  8 in total

1.  Development of the AGREE II, part 2: assessment of validity of items and tools to support application.

Authors:  Melissa C Brouwers; Michelle E Kho; George P Browman; Jako S Burgers; Françoise Cluzeau; Gene Feder; Béatrice Fervers; Ian D Graham; Steven E Hanna; Julie Makarski
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2010-05-31       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Development of the AGREE II, part 1: performance, usefulness and areas for improvement.

Authors:  Melissa C Brouwers; Michelle E Kho; George P Browman; Jako S Burgers; Francoise Cluzeau; Gene Feder; Béatrice Fervers; Ian D Graham; Steven E Hanna; Julie Makarski
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2010-05-31       Impact factor: 8.262

3.  Building health research systems to achieve better health.

Authors:  Stephen R Hanney; Miguel A González Block
Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst       Date:  2006-11-06

4.  The analysis of health research system evaluation in medical sciences universities.

Authors:  Sh Djalalinia; N Peykari; P Owlia; M Baradaran Eftekhari; E Habibi; K Falahat; Sh Mojarrab; H Malekafzali; M Ghanei
Journal:  Iran J Public Health       Date:  2013-01-01       Impact factor: 1.429

5.  Is a government-regulated rehabilitation guideline more effective than general practitioner education or preferred-provider rehabilitation in promoting recovery from acute whiplash-associated disorders? A pragmatic randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Pierre Côté; Eleanor Boyle; Heather M Shearer; Maja Stupar; Craig Jacobs; John David Cassidy; Simon Carette; Gabrielle van der Velde; Jessica J Wong; Sheilah Hogg-Johnson; Carlo Ammendolia; Jill Alison Hayden; Maurits van Tulder; John W Frank
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-01-24       Impact factor: 2.692

6.  Are current clinical guidelines on the use of Peripheral Intravenous Cannula for blood draws supported by evidence? An organizational case study.

Authors:  Alycia Jacob; Linda Coventry; Hugh Davies; Elisabeth Jacob
Journal:  Nurs Open       Date:  2020-08-05

7.  Needs assessment in health research projects: a new approach to project management in iran.

Authors:  Niloofar Peykari; Parviz Owlia; Hossein Malekafzali; Mostafa Ghanei; Abdolreza Babamahmoodi; Shirin Djalalinia
Journal:  Iran J Public Health       Date:  2013-02-01       Impact factor: 1.429

8.  Iranian Health Research Networks and Vision of Iran by 2025: A Case of Virtual Health Network in EMRI.

Authors:  Aa Keshtkar; Sh Djalalinia; P Khashayar; N Peykari; Z Mohammdi; B Larijani
Journal:  Iran J Public Health       Date:  2013-01-01       Impact factor: 1.429

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.