Suppr超能文献

什么影响着研究成果向卫生政策及实践的转化?来自英国和澳大利亚的观察

What influences the transfer of research into health policy and practice? Observations from England and Australia.

作者信息

Nutbeam D, Boxall A-M

机构信息

University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.

出版信息

Public Health. 2008 Aug;122(8):747-53. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2008.04.020. Epub 2008 Jun 17.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To explore the role of evidence in the public health policy-making process, and show how the way in which public health problems are defined and measured influences policy outcomes.

METHODS

The policy responses of the Blair Labour Government in the UK and the Howard Coalition Government in Australia to persistent health inequalities over the last decade are examined as a case study.

RESULTS

Soon after being elected, the Blair Government commissioned an independent inquiry into health inequalities, signalling the priority it gave to addressing this longstanding challenge. It chose to take a 'whole-of-government' approach, combining actions that addressed both personal risk factors and the social determinants of health. This approach reflects the long-established tradition in England of routinely measuring disparities in health outcomes and correlating them with socio-economic status and underlying social determinants of health. Over the same period, the Howard Government also outlined its 'whole-of-government' approach to addressing the most extreme and persistent health inequalities between indigenous and non-indigenous Australians. In contrast, its approach focused primarily on modifying risk factors and improving service provision. This approach reflects the different historical circumstances in Australia and a different tradition in the collection of health data, focused more on health service access and personal risk factors.

CONCLUSIONS

This case study offers some insight into the ways in which the production and presentation of evidence can influence and shape governmental responses to public health problems. The usefulness of available evidence is dependent upon the type of data that is produced routinely by government, as well as more deliberate decisions concerning public health research funding. Researchers can maximize the influence of research evidence on the policy process by engaging in the policy-making process, presenting research in ways that fit with the political context of the day, and, where necessary, using research evidence in public health advocacy in order to influence political priorities more directly.

摘要

目标

探讨证据在公共卫生政策制定过程中的作用,并展示公共卫生问题的定义和衡量方式如何影响政策结果。

方法

以英国布莱尔工党政府和澳大利亚霍华德联合政府在过去十年中对持续存在的健康不平等问题的政策回应为例进行研究。

结果

布莱尔政府当选后不久,就委托对健康不平等问题进行独立调查,这表明其对应对这一长期挑战的重视程度。它选择采取“政府整体”的方法,将解决个人风险因素和健康的社会决定因素的行动结合起来。这种方法反映了英格兰长期以来的传统,即定期衡量健康结果的差异,并将其与社会经济地位和健康的潜在社会决定因素相关联。同期,霍华德政府也概述了其“政府整体”方法,以解决澳大利亚原住民和非原住民之间最极端和持续存在的健康不平等问题。相比之下,其方法主要侧重于改变风险因素和改善服务提供。这种方法反映了澳大利亚不同的历史背景以及健康数据收集方面的不同传统,更多地关注医疗服务可及性和个人风险因素。

结论

本案例研究对证据的产生和呈现方式如何影响和塑造政府对公共卫生问题的应对提供了一些见解。现有证据的有用性取决于政府常规产生的数据类型,以及有关公共卫生研究资金的更慎重决策。研究人员可以通过参与政策制定过程、以符合当时政治背景的方式呈现研究结果,并在必要时在公共卫生宣传中使用研究证据,以更直接地影响政治优先事项,从而最大限度地提高研究证据对政策过程的影响。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验