• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

[研究人员与决策者之间的互动:一项案例研究]

[Interaction between researchers and decision-makers: a case study].

作者信息

Báscolo Ernesto, Yavich Natalia, Sánchez de León Adolfo

机构信息

Instituto de la Salud Juan Lazarte, Rosario, Argentina.

出版信息

Cad Saude Publica. 2006;22 Suppl:S47-56. doi: 10.1590/s0102-311x2006001300014.

DOI:10.1590/s0102-311x2006001300014
PMID:17086337
Abstract

This article analyzes the process of interaction between the Instituto de la Salud Juan Lazarte research team and the Buenos Aires Public Health Insurance (PHI) management team during the design and development of the study titled "PHI Institutional Capability Analysis and Performance Evaluation", currently underway. From a cross-disciplinary perspective, examining different areas of interaction between the SPS management team and the research team, the relationship is characterized as an application of the "interaction model". This approach promotes the construction of interfaces that allow the development of negotiation and collaboration between the scientific and political "communities". Application of this model has produced changes in the conceptual and methodological framework and in substantive issues during implementation of the SPSMI.

摘要

本文分析了胡安·拉扎特健康研究所研究团队与布宜诺斯艾利斯公共医疗保险(PHI)管理团队在目前正在进行的名为“PHI机构能力分析与绩效评估”研究的设计和开展过程中的互动过程。从跨学科的角度,审视公共卫生服务(SPS)管理团队与研究团队之间不同的互动领域,这种关系的特点是应用了“互动模型”。这种方法促进了接口的构建,使得科学“群体”与政治“群体”之间能够开展协商与合作。该模型的应用在公共卫生服务管理改进计划(SPSMI)实施过程中的概念和方法框架以及实质性问题方面都产生了变化。

相似文献

1
[Interaction between researchers and decision-makers: a case study].[研究人员与决策者之间的互动:一项案例研究]
Cad Saude Publica. 2006;22 Suppl:S47-56. doi: 10.1590/s0102-311x2006001300014.
2
[Governance in health: a conceptual and analytical approach to research].《卫生领域的治理:研究的概念与分析方法》
Cad Saude Publica. 2006;22 Suppl:S35-45. doi: 10.1590/s0102-311x2006001300013.
3
[Research for decision-making: a case study in Brazil].[决策研究:巴西的一个案例分析]
Cad Saude Publica. 2006;22 Suppl:S57-67. doi: 10.1590/s0102-311x2006001300015.
4
[Beyond dissemination: lessons from the interaction between researchers and decision-makers during a research project in Bogotá, Colombia].[超越传播:哥伦比亚波哥大一个研究项目中研究人员与决策者互动的经验教训]
Cad Saude Publica. 2006;22 Suppl:S77-85. doi: 10.1590/s0102-311x2006001300017.
5
Getting research to the policy table: a qualitative study with public health researchers on engaging with policy makers.将研究成果引入政策议程:一项针对公共卫生研究人员与政策制定者互动的定性研究
Prev Chronic Dis. 2015 Apr 30;12:E56. doi: 10.5888/pcd12.140546.
6
From theory to practice: improving the impact of health services research.从理论到实践:提高卫生服务研究的影响力。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2005 Jan 7;5:1. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-5-1.
7
Cross-sector learning among researchers and policy-makers: the search for new strategies to enable use of research results.研究人员与政策制定者之间的跨部门学习:寻求使研究成果得以应用的新策略。
Cad Saude Publica. 2006;22 Suppl:S97-108. doi: 10.1590/s0102-311x2006001300019.
8
Promoting Researchers and Policy-Makers Collaboration in Evidence-Informed Policy-Making in Nigeria: Outcome of a Two-Way Secondment Model between University and Health Ministry.促进尼日利亚研究人员和政策制定者在循证决策方面的合作:大学与卫生部之间双向借调模式的结果。
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2018 Jun 1;7(6):522-531. doi: 10.15171/ijhpm.2017.123.
9
Increasing the scale and adoption of population health interventions: experiences and perspectives of policy makers, practitioners, and researchers.增加人群健康干预措施的规模和采用:政策制定者、实践者和研究人员的经验和观点。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2014 Apr 15;12:18. doi: 10.1186/1478-4505-12-18.
10
How can we improve cancer care? A review of interprofessional collaboration models and their use in clinical management.如何改善癌症护理?对专业间协作模式及其在临床管理中的应用的综述。
Surg Oncol. 2011 Sep;20(3):146-54. doi: 10.1016/j.suronc.2011.06.004. Epub 2011 Jul 16.

引用本文的文献

1
Axiology and dynamics of contemporary research groups: a systematic review and hermeneutic meta-analysis of knowledge, values, and social elements.当代研究团队的价值论与动力学:对知识、价值观和社会要素的系统评价与诠释学元分析
Front Res Metr Anal. 2025 Aug 7;10:1525587. doi: 10.3389/frma.2025.1525587. eCollection 2025.