Evidence-based health policy: context and utilisation
AbstractEvidence-based decision-making is centred on the justification of decisions. In the shift from an individual-clinical to a population-policy level, the decision-making context becomes more uncertain, variable and complex. To address this we have developed a conceptual framework for evidence-based decision-making, focusing on how context impacts on what constitutes evidence and how that evidence is utilised. We present two distinct orientations towards what constitutes evidence, representing different relationships between evidence and context. We also categorise the decision-making context based on the ways in which context impacts on evidence-based decision-making. Furthermore, we invoke the concept of axes of evidence-based decision-making to describe the relationship between evidence and context as we move from evidence-based medicine to evidence-based health policy. From this, we suggest that it may be more important how evidence is utilised than how it is defined. Based on the research and knowledge utilisation literature, we present a process model of evidence utilisation, which forms the basis for the conceptual framework for context-based evidence-based decision-making. The conceptual framework attempts to capture the role that context plays in the introduction, interpretation and application of evidence. We illustrate this framework with examples from policy development for colorectal cancer screening.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Elsevier in its journal Social Science & Medicine.
Volume (Year): 58 (2004)
Issue (Month): 1 (January)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Hodgetts, Katherine & Elshaug, Adam G. & Hiller, Janet E., 2012. "What counts and how to count it: Physicians’ constructions of evidence in a disinvestment context," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(12), pages 2191-2199.
- Kurko, Terhi & Silvast, Antti & Wahlroos, Hannes & Pietilä, Kirsi & Airaksinen, Marja, 2012. "Is pharmaceutical policy evidence-informed? A case of the deregulation process of nicotine replacement therapy products in Finland," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(2), pages 246-255.
- Green, Andrew & Gerein, Nancy & Mirzoev, Tolib & Bird, Philippa & Pearson, Stephen & Anh, Le Vu & Martineau, Tim & Mukhopadhyay, Maitrayee & Qian, Xu & Ramani, K.V. & Soors, Werner, 2011. "Health policy processes in maternal health: A comparison of Vietnam, India and China," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(2), pages 167-173.
- de Goede, Joyce & Putters, Kim & van Oers, Hans, 2012. "Utilization of epidemiological research for the development of local public health policy in the Netherlands: A case study approach," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 74(5), pages 707-714.
- Rosella, Laura C. & Wilson, Kumanan & Crowcroft, Natasha S. & Chu, Anna & Upshur, Ross & Willison, Donald & Deeks, Shelley L. & Schwartz, Brian & Tustin, Jordan & Sider, Doug & Goel, Vivek, 2013. "Pandemic H1N1 in Canada and the use of evidence in developing public health policies – A policy analysis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 1-9.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.