Suppr超能文献

识别可信赖的专家:政策制定者如何找到并评估值得咨询或合作的公共卫生研究人员?

Identifying trustworthy experts: how do policymakers find and assess public health researchers worth consulting or collaborating with?

机构信息

Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2012;7(3):e32665. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0032665. Epub 2012 Mar 5.

Abstract

This paper reports data from semi-structured interviews on how 26 Australian civil servants, ministers and ministerial advisors find and evaluate researchers with whom they wish to consult or collaborate. Policymakers valued researchers who had credibility across the three attributes seen as contributing to trustworthiness: competence (an exemplary academic reputation complemented by pragmatism, understanding of government processes, and effective collaboration and communication skills); integrity (independence, "authenticity", and faithful reporting of research); and benevolence (commitment to the policy reform agenda). The emphases given to these assessment criteria appeared to be shaped in part by policymakers' roles and the type and phase of policy development in which they were engaged. Policymakers are encouraged to reassess their methods for engaging researchers and to maximise information flow and support in these relationships. Researchers who wish to influence policy are advised to develop relationships across the policy community, but also to engage in other complementary strategies for promoting research-informed policy, including the strategic use of mass media.

摘要

本文报告了半结构化访谈的数据,内容涉及 26 名澳大利亚公务员、部长和部长顾问如何寻找和评估他们希望咨询或合作的研究人员。政策制定者重视那些在被认为有助于可信度的三个属性方面具有公信力的研究人员:能力(卓越的学术声誉,辅以务实、了解政府流程以及有效的合作和沟通技巧);正直(独立性、“真实性”以及如实报告研究);和仁爱(对政策改革议程的承诺)。对这些评估标准的重视程度似乎部分取决于政策制定者的角色以及他们所参与的政策制定的类型和阶段。鼓励政策制定者重新评估他们与研究人员合作的方法,并在这些关系中最大限度地提高信息流动和支持。建议希望影响政策的研究人员在政策界建立关系,但也要采取其他互补策略来促进以研究为依据的政策,包括战略性地利用大众媒体。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

3
Teaching scientific evidence and critical thinking for policy making.为政策制定传授科学证据和批判性思维。
Biol Methods Protoc. 2024 Apr 11;9(1):bpae023. doi: 10.1093/biomethods/bpae023. eCollection 2024.

本文引用的文献

2
Getting evidence into policy: The need for deliberative strategies?将证据转化为政策:需要审慎的策略吗?
Soc Sci Med. 2011 Apr;72(7):1039-46. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.01.034. Epub 2011 Feb 24.
4
History matters for understanding knowledge exchange.历史对于理解知识交流至关重要。
Milbank Q. 2010 Dec;88(4):484-91. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0009.2010.00609.x.
8
How do drug policy makers access research evidence?药物政策制定者如何获取研究证据?
Int J Drug Policy. 2009 Jan;20(1):70-5. doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2007.11.017. Epub 2008 Jan 15.
10
An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output.一个用于量化个人科研产出的指标。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Nov 15;102(46):16569-72. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0507655102. Epub 2005 Nov 7.

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