plueme/wizJson huggingface dataset:
location: nan, 'Global 
year: 2023 source: BMC 
title: Research- vs. government-driven physical activity policy monitoring: a systematic review across different levels of government 
abstract:BackgroundEven though the importance of physical activity policy monitoring has increased in the last decade, there is a lack of understanding what different approaches exist and which methodology they employ. In order to address this research gap, this review attempts to map existing approaches of physical activity policy monitoring and to analyse methodological aspects, especially with regards to the roles of governments and researchers.MethodsA systematic search was conducted in five scientific databases (PubMed, Scopus, SportDiscus, Psycinfo, Web of Knowledge) in July 2021, and the identified records were screened independently by two reviewers. Records were included if they (a) focused on the monitoring of public policies to promote PA, (b) allowed to compare policies across time, across nations/regions or across policy sectors, and (c) were written in English, German or Russian. During full text analysis, information on methodological aspects was extracted and studies were categorized based on the level of government involvement.ResultsThe search yielded in a total of 112 studies. 86 of these studies (76.8%) followed a research-driven approach (little or no government involvement) while only two studies (1.8%) were based on a government-driven approach (led by governments). The remaining 24 studies (21.4%) were based on a co-production approach (strong collaboration between researchers and governments). All in all, 18 different tools for physical activity policy monitoring were identified; key examples are the Report Cards on Physical Activity for Children and Youth (research-driven approach), the HEPA Monitoring Framework (government-driven approach) and the HEPA Policy Audit Tool (co-production approach).ConclusionsThe level of government involvement in policy monitoring differs significantly, and research-driven, government-driven and co-production approaches can be distinguished. These approaches have different strengths and weaknesses, and can be linked to distinct theories of change and models on research-policy relations. Increasing awareness on the implications of these approaches is key to improve the understanding and further development of physical activity policy monitoring.
location: nan, 'Global 
year: 2023 source: BMC 
title: Conceptualising the value of simulation modelling for public engagement with policy: a critical literature review 
abstract:As we face complex and dynamically changing public health and environmental challenges, simulation modelling has come to occupy an increasingly central role in public engagements with policy. Shifts are occurring not only in terms of wider public understandings of modelling, but also in how the value of modelling is conceptualised within scientific modelling communities. We undertook a critical literature review to synthesise the underlying epistemic, theoretical and methodological assumptions about the role and value of simulation modelling within the literature across a range of fields (e.g., health, social science and environmental management) that engage with participatory modelling approaches. We identified four cross-cutting narrative conceptualisations of the value of modelling across different research traditions: (1) models simulate and help solve complex problems; (2) models as tools for community engagement; (3) models as tools for consensus building; (4) models as volatile technologies that generate social effects. Exploring how these ideas of ‘value’ overlap and what they offer one another has implications for how participatory simulation modelling approaches are designed, evaluated and communicated to diverse audiences. Deeper appreciation of the conditions under which simulation modelling can catalyse multiple social effects is recommended.
location: nan, 'Global 
year: 2023 source: BMC 
title: Adopting standardized cancer patient pathways as a policy at different organizational levels in the Swedish Health System 
abstract:BackgroundStandardized cancer patient pathways as a new policy has been adopted in healthcare to improve the quality of cancer care. Within the health systems, actors at different levels manage the adoption of new policies to develop healthcare. The various actors on different levels play an important role and influence the policy adoption process. Thus, knowledge about how these actors use strategies when adopting cancer patient pathways as a policy in the health system becomes central.MethodThe study’s aim was to explore how actors at different organizational levels in the health system adopted cancer patient pathways. Our overarching case was the Swedish health system at the national, regional, and local levels. Constructivist Grounded Theory Method was used to collect and analyze qualitative interviews with persons working in organizations directly involved in adopting cancer patient pathways at each level. Twelve individual and nine group interviews were conducted including 53 participants.ResultsOrganizational actors at three different levels used distinct strategies during the adoption of cancer patient pathways: acting as—missionaries, fixers, and doers. Acting as missionaries consisted of preaching the idea of cancer patient pathways and framing it with a common purpose to agree upon. Acting as fixers entailed creating a space to put cancer patient pathways into practice and overcome challenges to this. Acting as doers comprised balancing breadth and speed in healthcare provision with not being involved in the development of cancer patient pathways for the local context. These strategies were not developed in isolation from the other organizational levels but rather, each level interacted with one another.ConclusionsWhen adopting new policies, it is important to be aware of the different strategies and actors at various organizational levels in health systems. Even when actors on different levels developed separate strategies, if these contribute to fulfilling the four domains of inter-organizational collaboration, they can work well together to adopt new policies. Our study highlighted that the application of two domains was lacking, which meant that local actors were not sufficiently involved in collaboration, thus constricting the local use and optimization of cancer patient pathways in practice.
location: nan, 'Global 
year: 2023 source: BMC 
title: Disseminating health research to public health policy-makers and practitioners: a survey of source, message content and delivery modality preferences 
abstract:BackgroundUnderstanding the views of policy-makers and practitioners regarding how best to communicate research evidence is important to support research use in their decision-making.AimTo quantify and describe public health policy-makers and practitioners’ views regarding the source, content and form of messages describing public health research findings to inform their decision-making. We also sought to examine differences in preferences between public health policy-makers and practitioners.MethodsA cross sectional, value-weighting survey of policy-makers and practitioners was conducted. Participants were asked to allocate a proportion of 100 points across different (i) sources of research evidence, (ii) message content and (iii) the form in which evidence is presented. Points were allocated based on their rating of influence, usefulness and preference when making decisions about health policy or practice.ResultsA total of 186 survey responses were received from 90 policy-makers and 96 practitioners. Researchers and government department agencies were the most influential source of research evidence based on mean allocation of points, followed by knowledge brokers, professional peers and associations. Mean point allocation for perceived usefulness of message content was highest for simple summary of key findings and implications, and then evidence-based recommendations and data and statistical summaries. Finally, based on mean scores, policy-makers and practitioners preferred to receive research evidence in the form of peer-reviewed publications, reports, evidence briefs and plain language summaries. There were few differences in scores between policy-makers and practitioners across source, message content or form assessments or those with experience in different behavioural areas.ConclusionsThe findings should provide a basis for the future development and optimization of dissemination strategies to this important stakeholder group.
location: nan, 'Global 
year: 2023 source: BMC 
title: Implementation strategies and outcome measures for advancing learning health systems: a mixed methods systematic review 
abstract:BackgroundLearning health systems strive to continuously integrate data and evidence into practice to improve patient outcomes and ensure value-based healthcare. While the LHS concept is gaining traction, the operationalization of LHSs is underexplored.ObjectiveTo identify and synthesize the existing evidence on the implementation and evaluation of advancing learning health systems across international health care settings.MethodsA mixed methods systematic review was conducted. Six databases (CINAHL, Embase, Medline, PAIS, Scopus and Nursing at Allied Health Database) were searched up to July 2022 for terms related to learning health systems, implementation, and evaluation measures. Any study design, health care setting and population were considered for inclusion. No limitations were placed on language or date of publication. Two reviewers independently screened the titles, abstracts, and full texts of identified articles. Data were extracted and synthesized using a convergent integrated approach. Studies were critically appraised using relevant JBI critical appraisal checklists.ResultsThirty-five studies were included in the review. Most studies were conducted in the United States (n = 21) and published between 2019 and 2022 (n = 24). Digital data capture was the most common LHS characteristic reported across studies, while patient engagement, aligned governance and a culture of rapid learning and improvement were reported least often. We identified 33 unique strategies for implementing LHSs including: change record systems, conduct local consensus discussions and audit & provide feedback. A triangulation of quantitative and qualitative data revealed three integrated findings related to the implementation of LHSs: (1) The digital infrastructure of LHSs optimizes health service delivery; (2) LHSs have a positive impact on patient care and health outcomes; and (3) LHSs can influence health care providers and the health system.ConclusionThis paper provides a comprehensive overview of the implementation of LHSs in various healthcare settings. While this review identified key implementation strategies, potential outcome measures, and components of functioning LHSs, further research is needed to better understand the impact of LHSs on patient, provider and population outcomes, and health system costs. Health systems researchers should continue to apply the LHS concept in practice, with a stronger focus on evaluation.
location: nan, 'Global 
year: 2023 source: BMC 
title: Development of the National Policy for Quality in Healthcare for Malaysia 
abstract:BackgroundQuality in healthcare is a fundamental pillar of health systems performance, leading to improved health outcomes and reduced waste. The World Health Organization recommends that countries establish a national quality policy and strategy (NQPS) to steer the provision of safe and high-performing healthcare services and foster a quality culture. This paper describes the development process and key content of Malaysia’s new 5-year National Policy for Quality in Healthcare.MethodsThe development process was managed by a technical working group led by the Institute for Health Systems Research in the Ministry of Health. Situational analysis was conducted through a multi-pronged approach, underpinned by a review of the past and present healthcare sectoral and quality plans and guided by the WHO NQPS framework. This approach involved: (i) review of quality-related policy documents, (ii) online surveys of healthcare providers and the public, (iii) key-informant facilitated discussions and (iv) mapping of existing quality improvement initiatives (QIIs). Data gathered from these approaches informed the content of the new policy. Following thematic analysis, the findings were grouped into specific domains, which were then organized into a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) framework. ResultsTen key areas of concern identified were (i) a people-centred holistic approach, (ii) governance for quality, (iii) resources, (iv) quality culture, (v) stakeholder engagement, (vi) health management information system, (vii) workforce competency, (viii) knowledge exchange, (ix) quality indicators and (x) monitoring and evaluation of quality activities. These led to the formulation of seven strategic priorities  for the  planning of improvements aimed at addressing the key areas of concern. The national definition of quality was affirmed. A total of 40 QIIs were mapped and grouped into three broad categories, namely (i) regulatory, (ii) domain-specific QIIs and (iii) Quality Improvement (QI) method.ConclusionsThe National Policy for Quality in Healthcare for Malaysia was developed through a comprehensive situational analysis using a multi-method approach that identified priorities across national, state, institutional and community levels. This evidence-informed approach led to meaningful contextual adaptation of the NQPS framework to shape the strategic direction to advance quality and achieve effective and safe outcomes for all Malaysians.
location: nan, 'Global 
year: 2023 source: BMC 
title: Current status and influencing factors of policy identification in health impact assessment: a case study of Zhejiang Province 
abstract:BackgroundHealth impact assessment (HIA) is a procedure, method and tool for evaluating the potential health impacts of policies, plans and construction projects, as well as the distribution of these impacts on population. Majority of international studies on health impact assessment have focussed on conceptual papers or case evaluations, neglecting participants’ views on policies.MethodsA semi-structured interview with 30 health impact assessment experts was employed in this study, and the Nvivo software was utilized to analyse factors that influence policy identification. Subsequently, a multi-stage stratified random sampling method was adopted to survey 655 pilot staff members involved in health impact assessment in Zhejiang Province. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the current status and identify the factors influencing policy identification. In addition, hierarchical linear regression analysis and structural equation modelling were employed to determine the relationship between policy identification and influencing factors.ResultsStatistically significant differences were found among participants in the level of identification of policies across three dimensions. The policy sentiment dimension had the highest score (4.137 ± 0.664), followed by policy cognition (4.075 ± 0.632) and policy evaluation (3.631 ± 0.797) dimensions. Subject trust had a positive impact on policy cognition (β = 0.503, P < 0.001), policy sentiment (β = 0.504, P < 0.001) and policy evaluation (β = 0.465, P < 0.001). Procedural justice had a positive impact on policy sentiment (β = 0.085, P < 0.01) and policy evaluation (β = 0.084, P < 0.05), but not policy cognition (β = 0.056, P > 0.05). Policy identification is influenced by age and average monthly salary among other factors.ConclusionThese results highlight the importance of subjective trust and procedural justice in policy identification of health impact assessment. They provide valuable insights to developing interventions to overcome barriers to the implementation and enhancement of global identification of policies. Going forward, cross-sectoral synergies, enhanced international communication and training to increase participants’ trust in the policy should be optimized to improve health impact assessment. Additional measures should be taken, such as ensuring seamless communication channels, embedding health impact assessment in administrative mechanisms, and establishing strong oversight and grievance mechanisms to improve fairness and transparency in the implementation and results of health impact assessment.
location: nan, 'Global 
year: 2023 source: BMC 
title: Overcoming the challenges facing Nepal’s health system during federalisation: an analysis of health system building blocks 
abstract:IntroductionNepal’s move to a federal system was a major constitutional and political change, with significant devolution of power and resources from the central government to seven newly created provinces and 753 local governments. Nepal’s health system is in the process of adapting to federalism, which is a challenging, yet potentially rewarding, task. This research is a part of broader study that aims to explore the opportunities and challenges facing Nepal’s health system as it adapts to federalisation.MethodsThis exploratory qualitative study was conducted across the three tiers of government (federal, provincial, and local) in Nepal. We employed two methods: key informant interviews and participatory policy analysis workshops, to offer an in-depth understanding of stakeholders’ practical learnings, experiences, and opinions. Participants included policymakers, health service providers, local elected members, and other local stakeholders. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, translated into English, and analysed thematically using the six WHO (World Health Organization) health system building blocks as a theoretical framework.ResultsParticipants noted both opportunities and challenges around each building block. Identified opportunities were: (a) tailored local health policies and plans, (b) improved health governance at the municipality level, (c) improved health infrastructure and service capacity, (d) improved outreach services, (e) increased resources (health budgets, staffing, and supplies), and (f) improved real-time data reporting from health facilities. At the same time, several challenges were identified including: (a) poor coordination between the tiers of government, (b) delayed release of funds, (c) maldistribution of staff, (d) problems over procurement, and (e) limited monitoring and supervision of the quality of service delivery and data reporting.ConclusionOur findings suggest that since federalisation, Nepal’s health system performance is improving, although much remains to be accomplished. For Nepal to succeed in its federalisation process, understanding the challenges and opportunities is vital to improving each level of the health system in terms of (a) leadership and
governance, (b) service delivery, (c) health financing, (d) health workforce, (e) access to essential medicines and technologies and (f) health information system.
location: nan, 'Global 
year: 2023 source: BMC 
title: Connections between health research systems and decision-making spaces: lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic in the province of Québec, Canada 
abstract:The coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic allowed for exceptional decision-making power to be placed in the hands of public health departments. Data and information were widely disseminated in the media and on websites. While the improvement of pandemic management is still a learning curve, the ecosystem perspective – that is, the interconnection of academic health research systems and decision-making spaces – has received little attention. In this commentary, we look at the mechanisms in place, or not, in Canada for ensuring decision-making spheres can “speak” to academic research systems. We look at the thick walls that are still in place between health research systems and decision-making spaces. More precisely, we discuss three organizational flaws that we identified in the evidence-informed decision-making ecosystem of Québec and, more broadly, Canada. We introduce some inspiring measures that other countries have implemented to better link evidence and public health decision-making during health crises. The observed flaws and options are related to the vitality of early information sharing relays, the cross-sectional capacity to issue opinions, and the collection and integration of hard and soft data.
location: nan, 'Global 
year: 2023 source: BMC 
title: Barriers and facilitators of implementing electronic monitors to improve adherence and health outcomes in tuberculosis patients: protocol for a systematic review based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research 
abstract:BackgroundTuberculosis (TB) has been regarded as ‘a relentless scourge’, increasing morbidity and mortality and burdening vulnerable populations. Poor adherence to TB treatment and ineffective traditional interventions hinders TB control. A novel TB approach called ‘electronic monitors’, equipping medication boxes with daily audio or visual reminders for electronically monitoring medication intake, seems promising in improving adherence and health outcomes and overcoming the weaknesses of traditional interventions. However, no review has systematically examined and synthesized the influencing factors of implementing electronic monitors. Implementation research offers the means to analyse the influencing factors of the implementation and its process, fitting well with the aim of this review. Therefore, the widely recognized Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), which offers a common taxonomy for evaluating intervention implementation, will be adopted to systematically identify barriers and facilitators of the electronic monitors for improving adherence and health outcomes in patients with TB.Methods and analysisThe systematic review will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Literature research will be conducted in five electronic databases (Ovid MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science) to identify the barriers and facilitators of implementing electronic monitors in patients with TB. The CFIR will be used as a guide for categorizing and synthesizing the barriers and facilitators. Study screening, data extraction, quality appraisal and data analysis will be conducted by two independent reviewers. The use of additional reviewers will solve any disagreements between the two reviewers.DiscussionGiven the increased prominence of TB epidemiology and the adherence problem of electronic monitors, there is a solid rationale for synthesizing the existing studies via the CFIR. The findings and conclusion of this review will lay bare the achievements and effectiveness of implementing electronic monitors, as well as the attendant gaps and limitations. Further strategies for facilitating the implementation of electronic monitors will also be explored. This review will be of essential significance for research and practice, supporting future academic research initiatives centred on patients with TB and aiding electronic monitor design in lowering the morbidity and mortality associated with TB disease.Trial registration number: PROSPERO: CRD42023395747.