Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine (LSTM), UK.
Health Res Policy Syst. 2011 Jun 16;9 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S3. doi: 10.1186/1478-4505-9-S1-S3.
Assessing the impact that research evidence has on policy is complex. It involves consideration of conceptual issues of what determines research impact and policy change. There are also a range of methodological issues relating to the question of attribution and the counter-factual. The dynamics of SRH, HIV and AIDS, like many policy arenas, are partly generic and partly issue- and context-specific. Against this background, this article reviews some of the main conceptualisations of research impact on policy, including generic determinants of research impact identified across a range of settings, as well as the specificities of SRH in particular. We find that there is scope for greater cross-fertilisation of concepts, models and experiences between public health researchers and political scientists working in international development and research impact evaluation. We identify aspects of the policy landscape and drivers of policy change commonly occurring across multiple sectors and studies to create a framework that researchers can use to examine the influences on research uptake in specific settings, in order to guide attempts to ensure uptake of their findings. This framework has the advantage that distinguishes between pre-existing factors influencing uptake and the ways in which researchers can actively influence the policy landscape and promote research uptake through their policy engagement actions and strategies. We apply this framework to examples from the case study papers in this supplement, with specific discussion about the dynamics of SRH policy processes in resource poor contexts. We conclude by highlighting the need for continued multi-sectoral work on understanding and measuring research uptake and for prospective approaches to receive greater attention from policy analysts.
评估研究证据对政策的影响是复杂的。它涉及到确定研究影响和政策变化的概念问题的考虑。还有一系列与归因和反事实相关的方法问题。与许多政策领域一样,SRH、HIV 和艾滋病的动态既有普遍性,也有特定问题和具体情况。在此背景下,本文回顾了一些关于研究对政策影响的主要概念化,包括在一系列环境中确定的研究影响的一般决定因素,以及 SRH 的特殊性。我们发现,公共卫生研究人员和从事国际发展和研究影响评估的政治科学家之间有更大的交叉概念、模型和经验的空间。我们确定了政策景观的各个方面和政策变化的驱动因素,这些方面在多个部门和研究中普遍存在,以创建一个框架,研究人员可以用它来研究特定环境中对研究采用的影响,以指导努力确保在特定环境中采用他们的研究成果。该框架的优点是区分了影响采用的预先存在的因素,以及研究人员如何通过其政策参与行动和策略积极影响政策环境并促进研究采用。我们将该框架应用于本增刊中案例研究论文的示例中,并特别讨论了资源匮乏环境中 SRH 政策进程的动态。最后,我们强调需要继续进行多部门工作,以理解和衡量研究采用情况,并需要前瞻性方法得到政策分析人员的更多关注。