• 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

相似文献

1
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.
2
Scaling up population health interventions from decision to sustainability - a window of opportunity? A qualitative view from policy-makers.扩大从决策到可持续性的人群健康干预措施——一个机遇之窗?政策制定者的定性观点。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2020 Oct 9;18(1):118. doi: 10.1186/s12961-020-00636-3.
3
The concept of scalability: increasing the scale and potential adoption of health promotion interventions into policy and practice.可扩展性概念:将健康促进干预措施的规模和潜在采用度扩大到政策和实践中。
Health Promot Int. 2013 Sep;28(3):285-98. doi: 10.1093/heapro/dar097. Epub 2012 Jan 12.
4
Research outcomes informing the selection of public health interventions and strategies to implement them: A cross-sectional survey of Australian policy-maker and practitioner preferences.研究结果为公共卫生干预措施和实施策略的选择提供信息:澳大利亚政策制定者和实践者偏好的横断面调查。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2024 May 14;22(1):58. doi: 10.1186/s12961-024-01144-4.
5
The challenge of bridging the gap between researchers and policy makers: experiences of a Health Policy Research Group in engaging policy makers to support evidence informed policy making in Nigeria.弥合研究人员与政策制定者之间差距的挑战:一个卫生政策研究小组在促使政策制定者支持尼日利亚循证政策制定方面的经验。
Global Health. 2016 Nov 4;12(1):67. doi: 10.1186/s12992-016-0209-1.
6
Great expectations: An analysis of researchers' and policy makers' perceptions of the potential value of the Australian indigenous burden of disease study for policy.厚望:研究人员与政策制定者对澳大利亚原住民疾病负担研究之于政策的潜在价值的认知分析
Int J Health Plann Manage. 2018 Jan;33(1):e181-e193. doi: 10.1002/hpm.2445. Epub 2017 Jul 30.
7
Issues affecting therapist workforce and service delivery in the disability sector in rural and remote New South Wales, Australia: perspectives of policy-makers, managers and senior therapists.影响澳大利亚新南威尔士州农村和偏远地区残疾部门治疗师劳动力及服务提供的问题:政策制定者、管理人员和高级治疗师的观点
Rural Remote Health. 2012;12:1903. Epub 2012 Jun 11.
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
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
10
How is the use of research evidence in health policy perceived? A comparison between the reporting of researchers and policy-makers.研究证据在卫生政策中的应用是如何被感知的?研究人员和政策制定者报告的比较。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2018 Jul 20;16(1):64. doi: 10.1186/s12961-018-0345-6.

引用本文的文献

1
Policymaker Perspectives on the Role of Health Systems in Sustainable Hepatitis C Point-Of-Care Testing in Australia.政策制定者对澳大利亚卫生系统在丙型肝炎即时检测可持续性方面作用的看法。
J Viral Hepat. 2025 Oct;32(10):e70080. doi: 10.1111/jvh.70080.
2
Learning Care Pathways Framework: A New Method to Implement, Learn, Replicate, and Scale up Care Pathways for and With the Patient.学习型护理路径框架:一种为患者并与患者共同实施、学习、复制和扩大护理路径的新方法。
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2025;14:8517. doi: 10.34172/ijhpm.8517. Epub 2025 Mar 11.
3
Characterisation of At-Scale Community Health Interventions Aimed to Improve Healthy Eating Behaviour in Australia: A Rapid Review.旨在改善澳大利亚健康饮食行为的大规模社区健康干预措施的特征:一项快速综述。
Health Promot J Austr. 2025 Jul;36(3):e70061. doi: 10.1002/hpja.70061.
4
How Is Scale Incorporated Into the Economic Evaluation of Interventions to Prevent Obesity or to Improve Obesity-Related Risk Factors: A Systematic Scoping Review.如何将量表纳入预防肥胖或改善肥胖相关危险因素干预措施的经济评估:一项系统综述。
Obes Rev. 2025 Sep;26(9):e13942. doi: 10.1111/obr.13942. Epub 2025 May 21.
5
Peer-led digital health lifestyle intervention for a low-income community at risk for cardiovascular diseases (MYCardio-PEER): a quasi-experimental study protocol.针对心血管疾病高危低收入社区的同伴主导数字健康生活方式干预(MYCardio-PEER):一项准实验研究方案。
Prim Health Care Res Dev. 2025 Mar 3;26:e20. doi: 10.1017/S1463423625000192.
6
Challenges and enablers for scaling up interventions targeting non-communicable diseases: a qualitative study applying the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to 19 research projects worldwide.扩大非传染性疾病干预措施的挑战与推动因素:一项将实施研究综合框架应用于全球19个研究项目的定性研究
BMJ Public Health. 2024 Apr 26;2(1):e000710. doi: 10.1136/bmjph-2023-000710. eCollection 2024 Jun.
7
Strengthening policy engagement when scaling up interventions targeting non-communicable diseases: insights from a qualitative study across 20 countries.加强针对非传染性疾病的干预措施扩大规模时的政策参与:来自 20 个国家的定性研究的见解。
Health Policy Plan. 2024 Nov 18;39(Supplement_2):i39-i53. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czae043.
8
Mobilizing stakeholders for implant removals in Burkina Faso using landscape assessment data.利用景观评估数据在布基纳法索动员利益相关者进行植入物移除。
BMC Womens Health. 2024 May 20;24(1):301. doi: 10.1186/s12905-024-03121-z.
9
Research outcomes informing the selection of public health interventions and strategies to implement them: A cross-sectional survey of Australian policy-maker and practitioner preferences.研究结果为公共卫生干预措施和实施策略的选择提供信息:澳大利亚政策制定者和实践者偏好的横断面调查。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2024 May 14;22(1):58. doi: 10.1186/s12961-024-01144-4.
10
Evaluator's alignment as an important indicator of adequacy of the criteria and assessment procedure for recognizing the good practice in public health.评估者的一致性是公共卫生领域识别良好实践的标准和评估程序充分性的一个重要指标。
Front Public Health. 2024 Apr 22;12:1286509. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1286509. eCollection 2024.

本文引用的文献

1
Managing Clinical Knowledge for Health Care Improvement.管理临床知识以改善医疗保健。
Yearb Med Inform. 2000(1):65-70.
2
Protocol for CONSORT-SPI: an extension for social and psychological interventions.CONSORT-SPI 方案:社会和心理干预的扩展。
Implement Sci. 2013 Sep 2;8:99. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-8-99.
3
Policy and practice impacts of applied research: a case study analysis of the New South Wales Health Promotion Demonstration Research Grants Scheme 2000-2006.应用研究的政策和实践影响:以新南威尔士州健康促进示范研究资助计划(2000-2006 年)为例的分析。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2013 Feb 2;11:5. doi: 10.1186/1478-4505-11-5.
4
A qualitative study of governance of evolving response to non-communicable diseases in low-and middle- income countries: current status, risks and options.低、中收入国家对非传染性疾病不断演变的应对措施的治理:现状、风险和选择的定性研究。
BMC Public Health. 2012 Oct 16;12:877. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-12-877.
5
Scaling up maternal nutrition programs to improve birth outcomes: a review of implementation issues.扩大孕产妇营养项目以改善分娩结局:实施问题综述
Food Nutr Bull. 2012 Jun;33(2 Suppl):S6-26. doi: 10.1177/15648265120332S102.
6
Scaling up health promotion interventions: an emerging concept in implementation science.扩大健康促进干预措施:实施科学中的一个新兴概念。
Health Promot J Austr. 2011 Dec;22(3):238. doi: 10.1071/he11238.
7
The use of tacit and explicit knowledge in public health: a qualitative study.隐性知识和显性知识在公共卫生中的应用:一项定性研究。
Implement Sci. 2012 Mar 20;7:20. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-7-20.
8
The concept of scalability: increasing the scale and potential adoption of health promotion interventions into policy and practice.可扩展性概念:将健康促进干预措施的规模和潜在采用度扩大到政策和实践中。
Health Promot Int. 2013 Sep;28(3):285-98. doi: 10.1093/heapro/dar097. Epub 2012 Jan 12.
9
Public health research outputs from efficacy to dissemination: a bibliometric analysis.从疗效到传播的公共卫生研究成果:文献计量分析。
BMC Public Health. 2011 Dec 15;11:934. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-11-934.
10
Scaling up global health interventions: a proposed framework for success.全球卫生干预措施的扩大化:成功的拟议框架。
PLoS Med. 2011 Jun;8(6):e1001049. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001049. Epub 2011 Jun 28.

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。

Increasing the scale and adoption of population health interventions: experiences and perspectives of policy makers, practitioners, and researchers.

机构信息

Centre for Epidemiology and Evidence, NSW Ministry of Health, Locked Mail Bag 961, North Sydney, NSW 2059, Australia.

出版信息

Health Res Policy Syst. 2014 Apr 15;12:18. doi: 10.1186/1478-4505-12-18.

DOI:10.1186/1478-4505-12-18
PMID:24735455
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3996855/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Decisions to scale up population health interventions from small projects to wider state or national implementation is fundamental to maximising population-wide health improvements. The objectives of this study were to examine: i) how decisions to scale up interventions are currently made in practice; ii) the role that evidence plays in informing decisions to scale up interventions; and iii) the role policy makers, practitioners, and researchers play in this process.

METHODS

Interviews with an expert panel of senior Australian and international public health policy-makers (n = 7), practitioners (n = 7), and researchers (n = 7) were conducted in May 2013 with a participation rate of 84%.

RESULTS

Scaling up decisions were generally made through iterative processes and led by policy makers and/or practitioners, but ultimately approved by political leaders and/or senior executives of funding agencies. Research evidence formed a component of the overall set of information used in decision-making, but its contribution was limited by the paucity of relevant intervention effectiveness research, and data on costs and cost effectiveness. Policy makers, practitioners/service managers, and researchers had different, but complementary roles to play in the process of scaling up interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis articulates the processes of how decisions to scale up interventions are made, the roles of evidence, and contribution of different professional groups. More intervention research that includes data on the effectiveness, reach, and costs of operating at scale and key service delivery issues (including acceptability and fit of interventions and delivery models) should be sought as this has the potential to substantially advance the relevance and ultimately usability of research evidence for scaling up population health action.

摘要

背景

将人口健康干预措施从小规模项目扩大到更广泛的州或国家实施,对于最大限度地提高全民健康水平至关重要。本研究的目的是检验:i)目前在实践中如何做出扩大干预措施的决策;ii)证据在扩大干预措施决策中的作用;以及 iii)决策者、从业者和研究人员在这一过程中的作用。

方法

2013 年 5 月,对 7 名澳大利亚和国际公共卫生政策制定者、7 名从业者和 7 名研究人员进行了专家小组访谈,参与率为 84%。

结果

扩大决策通常是通过迭代过程进行的,由政策制定者和/或从业者领导,但最终由政治领导人和/或资助机构的高级管理人员批准。研究证据是决策中使用的整体信息的组成部分,但由于缺乏相关干预措施有效性研究以及成本和成本效益数据,其贡献有限。政策制定者、从业者/服务经理和研究人员在扩大干预措施的过程中可以发挥不同但互补的作用。

结论

本分析阐明了扩大干预措施决策的过程、证据的作用以及不同专业群体的贡献。应更多地寻求包括扩大规模运营的效果、覆盖面和成本以及关键服务提供问题(包括干预措施和交付模式的可接受性和适应性)的数据的干预研究,这有可能极大地提高研究证据对于扩大人口健康行动的相关性,并最终提高其可用性。