Suppr超能文献

一项关于新兴科学证据对既定结直肠癌筛查计划影响的前瞻性多案例研究:研究方案。

A prospective multiple case study of the impact of emerging scientific evidence on established colorectal cancer screening programs: a study protocol.

机构信息

Cancer Services & Policy Research Unit, Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

Implement Sci. 2012 Jun 1;7:51. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-7-51.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Health-policy decision making is a complex and dynamic process, for which strong evidentiary support is required. This includes scientifically produced research, as well as information that relates to the context in which the decision takes place. Unlike scientific evidence, this "contextual evidence" is highly variable and often includes information that is not scientifically produced, drawn from sources such as political judgement, program management experience and knowledge, or public values. As the policy decision-making process is variable and difficult to evaluate, it is often unclear how this heterogeneous evidence is identified and incorporated into "evidence-based policy" decisions. Population-based colorectal cancer screening poses an ideal context in which to examine these issues. In Canada, colorectal cancer screening programs have been established in several provinces over the past five years, based on the fecal occult blood test (FOBT) or the fecal immunochemical test. However, as these programs develop, new scientific evidence for screening continues to emerge. Recently published randomized controlled trials suggest that the use of flexible sigmoidoscopy for population-based screening may pose a greater reduction in mortality than the FOBT. This raises the important question of how policy makers will address this evidence, given that screening programs are being established or are already in place. This study will examine these issues prospectively and will focus on how policy makers monitor emerging scientific evidence and how both scientific and contextual evidence are identified and applied for decisions about health system improvement.

METHODS

This study will employ a prospective multiple case study design, involving participants from Ontario, Alberta, Manitoba, Nova Scotia, and Quebec. In each province, data will be collected via document analysis and key informant interviews. Documents will include policy briefs, reports, meeting minutes, media releases, and correspondence. Interviews will be conducted in person with senior administrative leaders, government officials, screening experts, and high-level cancer system stakeholders.

DISCUSSION

The proposed study comprises the third and final phase of an Emerging Team grant to address the challenges of health-policy decision making and colorectal cancer screening decisions in Canada. This study will contribute a unique prospective look at how policy makers address new, emerging scientific evidence in several different policy environments and at different stages of program planning and implementation. Findings will provide important insight into the various approaches that are or should be used to monitor emerging evidence, the relative importance of scientific versus contextual evidence for decision making, and the tools and processes that may be important to support challenging health-policy decisions.

摘要

背景

卫生政策决策是一个复杂且动态的过程,需要强有力的证据支持。这包括科学研究成果,以及与决策背景相关的信息。与科学证据不同,这种“背景证据”变化多样,通常包括非科学生成的信息,来源如政治判断、项目管理经验和知识、或公众价值观。由于政策决策过程具有多变性且难以评估,因此,这种异质证据是如何被识别并纳入“循证政策”决策的,往往并不明确。基于人群的结直肠癌筛查为检验这些问题提供了一个理想的背景。在加拿大,过去五年里,有几个省份基于粪便潜血试验(FOBT)或粪便免疫化学试验建立了结直肠癌筛查项目。然而,随着这些项目的发展,新的筛查科学证据不断涌现。最近发表的随机对照试验表明,使用软性乙状结肠镜进行人群筛查可能比 FOBT 更能降低死亡率。这就提出了一个重要问题,即鉴于筛查项目正在建立或已经到位,决策者将如何处理这一证据。本研究将前瞻性地研究这些问题,并重点关注决策者如何监测新出现的科学证据,以及如何识别和应用科学和背景证据,以做出改善卫生系统的决策。

方法

本研究将采用前瞻性多案例研究设计,参与者来自安大略省、艾伯塔省、马尼托巴省、新斯科舍省和魁北克省。在每个省份,将通过文件分析和关键知情人访谈收集数据。文件将包括政策简报、报告、会议记录、媒体发布和通信。将与高级行政领导、政府官员、筛查专家和高级癌症系统利益相关者进行面对面的访谈。

讨论

拟议的研究是解决加拿大卫生政策决策和结直肠癌筛查决策挑战的新兴团队拨款的第三也是最后一个阶段。本研究将对决策者在不同政策环境和不同计划规划和实施阶段如何处理新出现的科学证据进行独特的前瞻性研究。研究结果将为在不同政策环境下,以及在计划规划和实施的不同阶段,如何监测新出现的证据、科学证据与背景证据对决策的相对重要性,以及支持具有挑战性的卫生政策决策可能重要的工具和流程,提供重要的见解。

相似文献

3
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
4
Developing a decision aid to guide public sector health policy decisions: a study protocol.
Implement Sci. 2011 May 10;6:46. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-6-46.
5
Fecal occult blood test for colorectal cancer screening: an evidence-based analysis.
Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2009;9(10):1-40. Epub 2009 Sep 1.
6
Colorectal cancer prevention in Central, Eastern European and South Caucasus countries: a review of policy approaches.
J Health Organ Manag. 2024 May 28;ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print). doi: 10.1108/JHOM-02-2023-0030.
7
The impact of context on evidence utilization: a framework for expert groups developing health policy recommendations.
Soc Sci Med. 2006 Oct;63(7):1811-24. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2006.04.020. Epub 2006 Jun 9.

本文引用的文献

1
Getting evidence into policy: The need for deliberative strategies?
Soc Sci Med. 2011 Apr;72(7):1039-46. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.01.034. Epub 2011 Feb 24.
2
Evidence for colorectal cancer screening.
Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2010 Aug;24(4):417-25. doi: 10.1016/j.bpg.2010.06.005.
3
Fifteen years of bowel cancer screening policy in Australia: putting evidence into practice?
Med J Aust. 2010 Jul 5;193(1):37-42. doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2010.tb03739.x.
4
Once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy screening in prevention of colorectal cancer: a multicentre randomised controlled trial.
Lancet. 2010 May 8;375(9726):1624-33. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60551-X. Epub 2010 Apr 27.
5
Colorectal cancer testing in Canada--2008.
Health Rep. 2009 Sep;20(3):21-30.
6
Evidence-based policymaking: a critique.
Perspect Biol Med. 2009 Spring;52(2):304-18. doi: 10.1353/pbm.0.0085.
7
The impact of context on evidence utilization: a framework for expert groups developing health policy recommendations.
Soc Sci Med. 2006 Oct;63(7):1811-24. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2006.04.020. Epub 2006 Jun 9.
9
Evidence-based health policy: context and utilisation.
Soc Sci Med. 2004 Jan;58(1):207-17. doi: 10.1016/s0277-9536(03)00166-7.
10
Baseline findings of the Italian multicenter randomized controlled trial of "once-only sigmoidoscopy"--SCORE.
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002 Dec 4;94(23):1763-72. doi: 10.1093/jnci/94.23.1763.

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