Erica Bell1, Leonard Crocombe2, Steven Campbell3, Lynette R Goldberg4, Bastian M Seidel5. 1. Associate Professor, Health Policy and Service Research, University of Tasmania, Tasmania, Australia. 2. Associate Professor, Centre for Rural Health, School of Health Science, University of Tasmania, Tasmania, Australia. 3. Professor and Head, School of Health Science, University of Tasmania, Tasmania, Australia. 4. Senior Lecturer, Wicking Dementia Research and Education Centre, School of Medicine/Faculty of Health, University of Tasmania, Tasmania, Australia. 5. Clinical Associate Professor, Faculty of Science, Medicine and Health, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: No studies exist of the congruence of research in oral health to policy. This study aimed to examine the broad congruence of oral health research to policy, and implications for developing oral health research that is more policy relevant, particularly for the wider challenge of addressing unequal oral health outcomes, rather than specific policy translation issues. METHODS: Bayesian-based software was used in a multi-layered method to compare the conceptual content of 127,193 oral health research abstracts published between 2000-2012 with eight current oral health policy documents from Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries. FINDINGS: Fifty-five concepts defined the research abstracts, of which only eight were policy-relevant, and six of which were minor research concepts. CONCLUSIONS: The degree of disconnection between clinical concepts and healthcare system and workforce development concepts was striking. This study shows that, far from being "lost in translation," oral health research and policy are so different as to raise doubts about the extent to which research is policy-relevant and policy is research-based. The notion of policy relevance encompasses the lack of willingness of policy makers to embrace research, and the need for researchers to develop research that is, and is seen to be, policy-relevant.
BACKGROUND: No studies exist of the congruence of research in oral health to policy. This study aimed to examine the broad congruence of oral health research to policy, and implications for developing oral health research that is more policy relevant, particularly for the wider challenge of addressing unequal oral health outcomes, rather than specific policy translation issues. METHODS: Bayesian-based software was used in a multi-layered method to compare the conceptual content of 127,193 oral health research abstracts published between 2000-2012 with eight current oral health policy documents from Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries. FINDINGS: Fifty-five concepts defined the research abstracts, of which only eight were policy-relevant, and six of which were minor research concepts. CONCLUSIONS: The degree of disconnection between clinical concepts and healthcare system and workforce development concepts was striking. This study shows that, far from being "lost in translation," oral health research and policy are so different as to raise doubts about the extent to which research is policy-relevant and policy is research-based. The notion of policy relevance encompasses the lack of willingness of policy makers to embrace research, and the need for researchers to develop research that is, and is seen to be, policy-relevant.
Authors: Jan E Clarkson; Craig R Ramsay; Martin P Eccles; Sandra Eldridge; Jeremy M Grimshaw; Marie Johnston; Susan Michie; Shaun Treweek; Alan Walker; Linda Young; Irene Black; Debbie Bonetti; Heather Cassie; Jill Francis; Gillian Mackenzie; Lorna Macpherson; Lorna McKee; Nigel Pitts; Jim Rennie; Doug Stirling; Colin Tilley; Carole Torgerson; Luke Vale Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2010-07-20 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Iain Chalmers; Michael B Bracken; Ben Djulbegovic; Silvio Garattini; Jonathan Grant; A Metin Gülmezoglu; David W Howells; John P A Ioannidis; Sandy Oliver Journal: Lancet Date: 2014-01-08 Impact factor: 79.321