OBJECTIVES AND METHODS: Seventeen focus groups and 53 semi-structured individual interviews involving 205 planners and decision-makers were conducted in all 11 Regional Health Authorities (RHAs) in the province of Manitoba, Canada. Objectives were to explore perspectives on the nature and use of "evidence," and barriers to evidence-informed decision-making (EIDM). RESULTS: In spite of almost universal support in principle for using evidence in decision-making, there was little consensus among participants on what evidence is, what kind of evidence is most appropriate and how "using evidence" can best be demonstrated. Significant skepticism about EIDM was expressed. Issues related to workload, politicized decision-making and organizational factors dominated the discussion of decision-makers. Barriers to EIDM were commonly attributed to factors external to the RHAs. CONCLUSION: Effective strategies to promote EIDM must address the multiple barriers experienced by decision-makers in a complex decision-making environment. Rather than simply focusing on issues of access to evidence or development of individual capacity, strategies must focus on changing decision-making processes to support appropriate use of evidence.
OBJECTIVES AND METHODS: Seventeen focus groups and 53 semi-structured individual interviews involving 205 planners and decision-makers were conducted in all 11 Regional Health Authorities (RHAs) in the province of Manitoba, Canada. Objectives were to explore perspectives on the nature and use of "evidence," and barriers to evidence-informed decision-making (EIDM). RESULTS: In spite of almost universal support in principle for using evidence in decision-making, there was little consensus among participants on what evidence is, what kind of evidence is most appropriate and how "using evidence" can best be demonstrated. Significant skepticism about EIDM was expressed. Issues related to workload, politicized decision-making and organizational factors dominated the discussion of decision-makers. Barriers to EIDM were commonly attributed to factors external to the RHAs. CONCLUSION: Effective strategies to promote EIDM must address the multiple barriers experienced by decision-makers in a complex decision-making environment. Rather than simply focusing on issues of access to evidence or development of individual capacity, strategies must focus on changing decision-making processes to support appropriate use of evidence.
Authors: Elizabeth H Bradley; Tashonna R Webster; Dorothy Baker; Mark Schlesinger; Sharon K Inouye; Michael C Barth; Kate L Lapane; Debra Lipson; Robyn Stone; Mary Jane Koren Journal: Issue Brief (Commonw Fund) Date: 2004-07
Authors: C Louise Goggin; Thomas Barrett; John Leys; Gregory Summerell; Emma Gorrod; Stuart Waters; Mark Littleboy; Tony D Auld; Michael J Drielsma; Brian R Jenkins Journal: Environ Manage Date: 2019-01-11 Impact factor: 3.266
Authors: Lalla Aïda Guindo; Monika Wagner; Rob Baltussen; Donna Rindress; Janine van Til; Paul Kind; Mireille M Goetghebeur Journal: Cost Eff Resour Alloc Date: 2012-07-18