Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: Evidence for Health II: Overcoming barriers to using evidence in policy and practice
Authors: Andermann, A
Pang, T 
Newton, J.N
Davis, A
Panisset, U
Keywords: conflict of interest
consensus development
decision making
health care policy
human experiment
public health
scientific literature
decision making
evidence based medicine
information dissemination
organization and management
public opinion
Conflict of Interest
Decision Making
Evidence-Based Medicine
Health Policy
Information Dissemination
Policy Making
Public Opinion
Issue Date: 2016
Citation: Andermann, A, Pang, T, Newton, J.N, Davis, A, Panisset, U (2016). Evidence for Health II: Overcoming barriers to using evidence in policy and practice. Health Research Policy and Systems 14 (1) : 17. ScholarBank@NUS Repository.
Rights: Attribution 4.0 International
Abstract: Even the highest quality evidence will have little impact unless it is incorporated into decision-making for health. It is therefore critical to overcome the many barriers to using evidence in decision-making, including (1) missing the window of opportunity, (2) knowledge gaps and uncertainty, (3) controversy, irrelevant and conflicting evidence, as well as (4) vested interests and conflicts of interest. While this is certainly not a comprehensive list, it covers a number of main themes discussed in the knowledge translation literature on this topic, and better understanding these barriers can help readers of the evidence to be more savvy knowledge users and help researchers overcome challenges to getting their evidence into practice. Thus, the first step in being able to use research evidence for improving population health is ensuring that the evidence is available at the right time and in the right format and language so that knowledge users can take the evidence into consideration alongside a multitude of other factors that also influence decision-making. The sheer volume of scientific publications makes it difficult to find the evidence that can actually help inform decisions for health. Policymakers, especially in low- and middle-income countries, require context-specific evidence to ensure local relevance. Knowledge synthesis and dissemination of policy-relevant local evidence is important, but it is still not enough. There are times when the interpretation of the evidence leads to various controversies and disagreements, which act as barriers to the uptake of evidence. Research evidence can also be influenced and misused for various aims and agendas. It is therefore important to ensure that any new evidence comes from reliable sources and is interpreted in light of the overall body of scientific literature. It is not enough to simply produce evidence, nor even to synthesize and package evidence into a more user-friendly format. Particularly at the policy level, political savvy is also needed to ensure that vested interests do not undermine decisions that can impact the health of individuals and populations. © 2016 Andermann et al.
Source Title: Health Research Policy and Systems
ISSN: 14784505
DOI: 10.1186/s12961-016-0086-3
Rights: Attribution 4.0 International
Appears in Collections:Staff Publications

Show full item record
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormatAccess SettingsVersion 
10_1186_s12961-016-0086-3.pdf484.93 kBAdobe PDF



Google ScholarTM



This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons