Nicole Votruba1, Jonathan Grant2, Graham Thornicroft3. 1. Centre for Global Mental Health and Centre for Implementation Science, Health Service and Population Research Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience (IoPPN), King's College London, David Goldberg Centre, De Crespigny Park, Denmark Hill, PO Box 28, London, SE5 8AF, UK. nicole.votruba@kcl.ac.uk. 2. Policy Institute At King's, Virginia Woolf Building, The Strand, King's College London, London, UK. 3. Centre for Global Mental Health and Centre for Implementation Science, Health Service and Population Research Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience (IoPPN), King's College London, London, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mental health remains a neglected issue on the global health policy agenda, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), and the translation of research evidence into policy and practice is slow. The new EVITA framework was developed to improve mental health evidence uptake and policy agenda-setting in LMICs. In addition, behavioural science methods may be able to support knowledge translation to policy. METHODS: Using a mixed-methods study design, we applied and tested the newly developed EVITA 1.1 framework against three case studies related to South Africa at the district, national and international levels. In-depth interviews with 26 experts were conducted between August and November 2019, transcribed, coded and analysed in NVivo, using iterative categorization. The data were analysed against both the EVITA framework and the MINDSPACE framework for behavioural insights. RESULTS: In our case study comparison, we found that (1) research translation to the policy agenda occurs in a complex, fluid system which includes multiple "research clouds", "policy spheres" and other networks; (2) mental health research policy agenda-setting is based on key individuals and intermediaries and their interrelationships; and (3) key challenges and strategies for successful research to policy agenda impact are known, but are frequently not strategically implemented, such as including all stakeholders to overcome the policy implementation gap. Our data also suggest that behavioural science methods can be strategically applied to support knowledge translation to policy agenda-setting. CONCLUSION: We found that the EVITA framework is useful for understanding and improving mental health research policy interrelationships to support evidence uptake to the policy agenda, and that behavioural science methods are effective support mechanisms. The revised EVITA 2.0 framework therefore includes behavioural insights, for improved mental health policy agenda-setting in LMICs. More research is needed to understand whether EVITA can be applied to other LMICs and to high-income contexts.
BACKGROUND: Mental health remains a neglected issue on the global health policy agenda, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), and the translation of research evidence into policy and practice is slow. The new EVITA framework was developed to improve mental health evidence uptake and policy agenda-setting in LMICs. In addition, behavioural science methods may be able to support knowledge translation to policy. METHODS: Using a mixed-methods study design, we applied and tested the newly developed EVITA 1.1 framework against three case studies related to South Africa at the district, national and international levels. In-depth interviews with 26 experts were conducted between August and November 2019, transcribed, coded and analysed in NVivo, using iterative categorization. The data were analysed against both the EVITA framework and the MINDSPACE framework for behavioural insights. RESULTS: In our case study comparison, we found that (1) research translation to the policy agenda occurs in a complex, fluid system which includes multiple "research clouds", "policy spheres" and other networks; (2) mental health research policy agenda-setting is based on key individuals and intermediaries and their interrelationships; and (3) key challenges and strategies for successful research to policy agenda impact are known, but are frequently not strategically implemented, such as including all stakeholders to overcome the policy implementation gap. Our data also suggest that behavioural science methods can be strategically applied to support knowledge translation to policy agenda-setting. CONCLUSION: We found that the EVITA framework is useful for understanding and improving mental health research policy interrelationships to support evidence uptake to the policy agenda, and that behavioural science methods are effective support mechanisms. The revised EVITA 2.0 framework therefore includes behavioural insights, for improved mental health policy agenda-setting in LMICs. More research is needed to understand whether EVITA can be applied to other LMICs and to high-income contexts.
Entities:
Keywords:
Agenda-setting; Evidence-based policy-making; Evidence-informed policy-making; Framework; Knowledge translation and exchange; Low- and middle-income countries; Mental health; South Africa
Authors: Maya Semrau; Sara Evans-Lacko; Atalay Alem; Jose Luis Ayuso-Mateos; Dan Chisholm; Oye Gureje; Charlotte Hanlon; Mark Jordans; Fred Kigozi; Heidi Lempp; Crick Lund; Inge Petersen; Rahul Shidhaye; Graham Thornicroft Journal: BMC Med Date: 2015-04-10 Impact factor: 8.775
Authors: Crick Lund; Mark Tomlinson; Mary De Silva; Abebaw Fekadu; Rahul Shidhaye; Mark Jordans; Inge Petersen; Arvin Bhana; Fred Kigozi; Martin Prince; Graham Thornicroft; Charlotte Hanlon; Ritsuko Kakuma; David McDaid; Shekhar Saxena; Dan Chisholm; Shoba Raja; Sarah Kippen-Wood; Simone Honikman; Lara Fairall; Vikram Patel Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2012-12-27 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Thomas J Waltz; Byron J Powell; Monica M Matthieu; Laura J Damschroder; Matthew J Chinman; Jeffrey L Smith; Enola K Proctor; JoAnn E Kirchner Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2015-08-07 Impact factor: 7.327