Choi Bernard C K, Li Liping, Lu Yaogui, Zhang Li R, Zhu Yao, Pak Anita W P, Chen Yue, Little Julian
Injury Prevention Research Centre, Medical College of Shantou University, Shantou, China.
School of Epidemiology, Public Health and Preventive Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Implement Sci. 2016 Feb 6;11:16. doi: 10.1186/s13012-016-0377-7.
Bridging the gap between science and policy is an important task in evidence-informed policy making. The objective of this study is to prioritize ways to bridge the gap.
The study was based on an online survey of high-ranking scientists and policy makers who have a senior position in universities and governments in the health sector in China and Canada. The sampling frame comprised of universities with schools of public health and medicine and various levels of government in health and public health. Participants included university presidents and professors, and government deputy ministers, directors general and directors working in the health field. Fourteen strategies were presented to the participants for ranking as current ways and ideal ways in the future to bridge the gap between science and policy.
Over a 3-month survey period, there were 121 participants in China and 86 in Canada with response rates of 30.0 and 15.9 %, respectively. The top strategies selected by respondents included focus on policy (conducting research that focuses on policy questions), science-policy forums, and policy briefs, both as current ways and ideal ways to bridge the gap between science and policy. Conferences were considered a priority strategy as a current way, but not an ideal way in the future. Canadian participants were more in favor of using information technology (web-based portals and email updates) than their Chinese counterparts. Among Canadian participants, two strategies that were ranked low as current ways (collaboration in study design and collaboration in analysis) became a priority as ideal ways. This could signal a change in thinking in shifting the focus from the "back end" or "downstream" (knowledge dissemination) of the knowledge transfer process to the "front end" or "upstream" (knowledge generation).
Our international study has confirmed a number of previously reported priority strategies to bridge the gap between science and policy. More importantly, our study has contributed to the future work on evidence-based policy making by comparing the responses from China and Canada and the current and ideal way for the future. Our study shows that the concept and strategies of bridging the gap between science and policy are not static but varying in space and evolving over time.
弥合科学与政策之间的差距是循证决策中的一项重要任务。本研究的目的是确定弥合差距的优先方法。
该研究基于对中国和加拿大卫生部门大学及政府中担任高级职位的资深科学家和政策制定者的在线调查。抽样框架包括设有公共卫生学院和医学院的大学以及卫生和公共卫生领域的各级政府。参与者包括大学校长和教授,以及在卫生领域工作的政府副部长、总干事和主任。向参与者提出了14项策略,要求他们将其列为弥合科学与政策差距的当前方法和未来理想方法进行排序。
在为期3个月的调查期内,中国有121名参与者,加拿大有86名参与者,回复率分别为30.0%和15.9%。受访者选择的首要策略包括关注政策(开展关注政策问题的研究)、科学政策论坛和政策简报,这些都是弥合科学与政策差距的当前方法和理想方法。会议被视为当前的优先策略,但不是未来的理想方法。与中国参与者相比,加拿大参与者更倾向于使用信息技术(基于网络的门户网站和电子邮件更新)。在加拿大参与者中,两项作为当前方法排名较低的策略(研究设计中的合作和分析中的合作)成为理想方法的优先选择。这可能标志着思维的转变,即将重点从知识转移过程的“后端”或“下游”(知识传播)转向“前端”或“上游”(知识生成)。
我们这项国际研究证实了一些先前报道的弥合科学与政策差距的优先策略。更重要的是,我们的研究通过比较中国和加拿大的回复以及当前和未来的理想方法,为未来基于证据的决策工作做出了贡献。我们的研究表明,弥合科学与政策差距的概念和策略不是一成不变的,而是因空间而异并随时间演变的。