Author | Kuchenmüller, Tanja | |
Author | Boeira, Laura | |
Author | Oliver, Sandy | |
Author | Moat, Kaelan | |
Author | El‑Jardali, Fadi | |
Author | Barreto, Jorge Otávio Maia | |
Author | Lavis, John | |
Access date | 2023-06-27T22:40:00Z | |
Available date | 2023-06-27T22:40:00Z | |
Document date | 2022 | |
Citation | KUCHENMÜLLER, Tanja et al. Domains and processes for institutionalizing evidence-informed health policy-making: a critical interpretive synthesis. Health Research Policy and Systems, [s.l.], v. 20, n. 27, p.1-18, mar. 2022. | en_US |
ISSN | 1478-4505 | en_US |
URI | https://www.arca.fiocruz.br/handle/icict/59211 | |
Language | eng | en_US |
Publisher | Springer Nature | en_US |
Rights | open access | en_US |
MeSH | Evidence-Informed Policy | en_US |
MeSH | Institutionalization | en_US |
MeSH | Capacity Building | en_US |
MeSH | Translational Science, Biomedical | en_US |
MeSH | Sustainable Development | en_US |
Title | Domains and processes for institutionalizing evidence-informed health policy-making: a critical interpretive synthesis | en_US |
Type | Article | en_US |
DOI | 10.1186/s12961-022-00820-7 | |
Abstract | Background: While calls for institutionalization of evidence-informed policy-making (EIP) have become stronger
in recent years, there is a paucity of methods that governments and organizational knowledge brokers can use to
sustain and integrate EIP as part of mainstream health policy-making. The objective of this paper was to conduct a
knowledge synthesis of the published and grey literatures to develop a theoretical framework with the key features of
EIP institutionalization.
Methods: We applied a critical interpretive synthesis (CIS) that allowed for a systematic, yet iterative and dynamic
analysis of heterogeneous bodies of literature to develop an explanatory framework for EIP institutionalization. We
used a “compass” question to create a detailed search strategy and conducted electronic searches to identify papers
based on their potential relevance to EIP institutionalization. Papers were screened and extracted independently
and in duplicate. A constant comparative method was applied to develop a framework on EIP institutionalization.
The CIS was triangulated with the fndings of stakeholder dialogues that involved civil servants, policy-makers and
researchers.
Results: We identifed 3001 references, of which 88 papers met our eligibility criteria. This CIS resulted in a defnition
of EIP institutionalization as the “process and outcome of (re-)creating, maintaining and reinforcing norms, regulations,
and standard practices that, based on collective meaning and values, actions as well as endowment of resources,
allow evidence to become—over time—a legitimate and taken-for-granted part of health policy-making”. The
resulting theoretical framework comprised six key domains of EIP institutionalization that capture both structure and
agency: (1) governance; (2) standards and routinized processes; (3) partnership, collective action and support; (4) lead‑
ership and commitment; (5) resources; and (6) culture. Furthermore, EIP institutionalization is being achieved through
fve overlapping stages: (i) precipitating events; (ii) de-institutionalization; (iii) semi-institutionalization (comprising
theorization and difusion); (iv) (re)-institutionalization; and (v) renewed de-institutionalization processes.
Conclusions: This CIS advances the theoretical and conceptual discussions on EIP institutionalization, and provides
new insights into an evidence-informed framework for initiating, strengthening and/or assessing eforts to institution‑
alize EIP. | en_US |
Affilliation | World Health Organization. Research for Health. Science Division. Geneva, Switzerland. | en_US |
Affilliation | Governo do Estado de São Paulo. Secretaria de Estado de Saúde. Instituto de Saude. São Paulo, SP, Brasil. | en_US |
Affilliation | University College London. Social Research Institute. London, United Kingdom / University of Johannesburg. Faculty of Humanities. Johannesburg, South Africa. | en_US |
Affilliation | McMaster University. World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Evidence‑Informed Policy. McMaster Health Forum. Hamilton, ON, Canada / McMaster University. Department of Health Evidence and Impact. Hamilton, ON, Canada. | en_US |
Affilliation | American University of Beirut. World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Evidence‑Informed Policy and Practice. Knowledge to Policy (K2P) Center. Beirut, Lebanon / American University of Beirut. Department of Health Management and Policy. Beirut, Lebanon. | en_US |
Affilliation | Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Fiocruz Brasília. Brasília, DF, Brasil. | en_US |
Affilliation | University of Johannesburg. Faculty of Humanities. Johannesburg, South Africa / McMaster University. World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Evidence‑Informed Policy. McMaster Health Forum. Hamilton, ON, Canada / McMaster University. Department of Health Evidence and Impact. Hamilton, ON, Canada. | en_US |
Subject | Evidence‑informed policy | en_US |
Subject | Institutionalization | en_US |
Subject | Institutional capacity | en_US |
Subject | Knowledge translation | en_US |
Subject | Knowledge translation platform | en_US |
Subject | Sustainability | en_US |
Subject | Conceptual framework | en_US |
Subject | Definition | en_US |
DeCS | Política Informada por Evidências | en_US |
DeCS | Institucionalização | en_US |
DeCS | Fortalecimento Institucional | en_US |
DeCS | Ciência Translacional Biomédica | en_US |
DeCS | Desenvolvimento Sustentável | en_US |