• 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

运用叙事影响卫生决策:系统评价。

Using narratives to impact health policy-making: a systematic review.

机构信息

Center for Systematic Review for Health Policy and Systems Research, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.

Department of Health Management and Policy, Faculty of Health Sciences, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.

出版信息

Health Res Policy Syst. 2019 Mar 5;17(1):26. doi: 10.1186/s12961-019-0423-4.

DOI:10.1186/s12961-019-0423-4
PMID:30836972
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6402129/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

There is increased interest in using narratives or storytelling to influence health policies. We aimed to systematically review the evidence on the use of narratives to impact the health policy-making process.

METHODS

Eligible study designs included randomised studies, non-randomised studies, process evaluation studies, economic studies, qualitative studies, stakeholder analyses, policy analyses, and case studies. The MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), WHO Global Health Library, Communication and Mass Media Complete, and Google Scholar databases were searched. We followed standard systematic review methodology for study selection, data abstraction and risk of bias assessment. We synthesised the findings narratively and presented the results stratified according to the following stages of the policy cycle: (1) agenda-setting, (2) policy formulation, (3) policy adoption, (4) policy implementation and (5) policy evaluation. Additionally, we presented the knowledge gaps relevant to using narrative to impact health policy-making.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies met the eligibility criteria, and included case studies (n = 15), participatory action research (n = 1), documentary analysis (n = 1) and biographical method (n = 1). The majority were of very low methodological quality. In addition, none of the studies formally evaluated the effectiveness of the narrative-based interventions. Findings suggest that narratives may have a positive influence when used as inspiration and empowerment tools to stimulate policy inquiries, as educational and awareness tools to initiate policy discussions and gain public support, and as advocacy and lobbying tools to formulate, adopt or implement policy. There is also evidence of undesirable effects of using narratives. In one case study, narrative use led to widespread insurance reimbursement of a therapy for breast cancer that was later proven to be ineffective. Another case study described how the use of narrative inappropriately exaggerated the perceived risk of a procedure, which led to limiting its use and preventing a large number of patients from its benefits. A third case study described how optimistic 'cure' or 'hope' stories of children with cancer were selectively used to raise money for cancer research that ignored the negative realities. The majority of included studies did not provide information on the definition or content of narratives, the theoretical framework underlying the narrative intervention or the possible predictors of the success of narrative interventions.

CONCLUSION

The existing evidence base precludes any robust inferences about the impact of narrative interventions on health policy-making. We discuss the implications of the findings for research and policy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The review protocol is registered in PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews (ID =  CRD42018085011 ).

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3b36/6402129/91d88e871252/12961_2019_423_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3b36/6402129/91d88e871252/12961_2019_423_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3b36/6402129/91d88e871252/12961_2019_423_Fig1_HTML.jpg
摘要

背景

人们对使用叙事或讲故事来影响卫生政策越来越感兴趣。本研究旨在系统综述使用叙事来影响卫生政策制定过程的证据。

方法

合格的研究设计包括随机研究、非随机研究、过程评估研究、经济研究、定性研究、利益相关者分析、政策分析和案例研究。检索了 MEDLINE、PsycINFO、Cochrane 图书馆、护理学及相关健康专业文献累积索引(CINAHL)、世界卫生组织全球卫生图书馆、传播与大众媒体完整数据库和谷歌学术数据库。我们按照标准系统综述方法进行研究选择、数据提取和偏倚风险评估。我们对发现进行了叙述性综合,并根据政策周期的以下阶段进行了结果分层:(1)确定议程,(2)政策制定,(3)政策采纳,(4)政策实施和(5)政策评价。此外,我们还提出了与使用叙事来影响卫生政策制定相关的知识空白。

结果

有 18 项研究符合入选标准,包括案例研究(n=15)、参与性行动研究(n=1)、文献分析(n=1)和传记方法(n=1)。大多数研究的方法学质量非常低。此外,没有一项研究正式评估了基于叙事的干预措施的有效性。研究结果表明,叙事可以作为激发政策探究的灵感和赋权工具、作为发起政策讨论和获得公众支持的教育和意识工具、作为制定、采纳或实施政策的宣传和游说工具,具有积极的影响。也有证据表明使用叙事会产生不良影响。在一项案例研究中,叙事的使用导致了对一种乳腺癌治疗方法的广泛保险报销,而后来证明该方法是无效的。另一项案例研究描述了叙事的不恰当使用如何夸大了一种手术的感知风险,从而导致其使用受限,使大量患者无法从中受益。第三项案例研究描述了如何有选择地使用患有癌症的儿童的乐观“治愈”或“希望”的故事来为癌症研究筹集资金,而忽视了负面现实。大多数纳入的研究没有提供关于叙事的定义或内容、叙事干预背后的理论框架或叙事干预成功的可能预测因素的信息。

结论

现有证据基础不允许对叙事干预对卫生政策制定的影响做出任何稳健的推断。我们讨论了这些发现对研究和政策的意义。

试验注册

本研究方案已在 PROSPERO 国际前瞻性系统评价注册库(ID=CRD42018085011)注册。

相似文献

1
Using narratives to impact health policy-making: a systematic review.运用叙事影响卫生决策:系统评价。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2019 Mar 5;17(1):26. doi: 10.1186/s12961-019-0423-4.
2
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.在流行地区,服用抗叶酸抗疟药物的人群中,叶酸补充剂与疟疾易感性和严重程度的关系。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217.
3
Using media to impact health policy-making: an integrative systematic review.利用媒体影响卫生政策制定:一项综合性系统评价
Implement Sci. 2017 Apr 18;12(1):52. doi: 10.1186/s13012-017-0581-0.
4
Beyond the black stump: rapid reviews of health research issues affecting regional, rural and remote Australia.超越黑木树:影响澳大利亚地区、农村和偏远地区的健康研究问题的快速综述。
Med J Aust. 2020 Dec;213 Suppl 11:S3-S32.e1. doi: 10.5694/mja2.50881.
5
Strategies used for childhood chronic functional constipation: the SUCCESS evidence synthesis.用于儿童慢性功能性便秘的策略:SUCCESS 证据综合。
Health Technol Assess. 2024 Jan;28(5):1-266. doi: 10.3310/PLTR9622.
6
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.
7
Strategies for enhancing the implementation of school-based policies or practices targeting risk factors for chronic disease.加强针对慢性病风险因素的校本政策或实践实施的策略。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Nov 29;11(11):CD011677. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011677.pub2.
8
Intervention Now to Eliminate Repeat Unintended Pregnancy in Teenagers (INTERUPT): a systematic review of intervention effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, and qualitative and realist synthesis of implementation factors and user engagement.青少年重复意外怀孕干预消除计划(INTERUPT):干预效果与成本效益的系统评价,以及实施因素和用户参与的定性与实在论综合分析
Health Technol Assess. 2016 Feb;20(16):1-214. doi: 10.3310/hta20160.
9
Recovery schools for improving behavioral and academic outcomes among students in recovery from substance use disorders: a systematic review.改善物质使用障碍康复期学生行为和学业成果的康复学校:一项系统综述
Campbell Syst Rev. 2018 Oct 4;14(1):1-86. doi: 10.4073/csr.2018.9. eCollection 2018.
10
Impact of summer programmes on the outcomes of disadvantaged or 'at risk' young people: A systematic review.暑期项目对处境不利或“有风险”的年轻人的影响:一项系统综述。
Campbell Syst Rev. 2024 Jun 13;20(2):e1406. doi: 10.1002/cl2.1406. eCollection 2024 Jun.

引用本文的文献

1
'Honouring the storyteller': the potential of Playback Theatre in health policy and systems research.“致敬讲述者”:剧场回溯法在卫生政策与系统研究中的潜力
Health Policy Plan. 2025 Aug 18;40(7):809-815. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czaf038.
2
Born Too Soon: Every story counts: lessons in ethical, inclusive storytelling from born too soon.《早产:每个故事都很重要:从〈早产〉中汲取的道德、包容性叙事经验》
Reprod Health. 2025 Jun 23;22(Suppl 2):107. doi: 10.1186/s12978-025-02068-0.
3
Addressing health equity during design and implementation of health system reform initiatives: a scoping review and framework.

本文引用的文献

1
Evidence-based policymaking is not like evidence-based medicine, so how far should you go to bridge the divide between evidence and policy?循证决策不同于循证医学,那么在弥合证据与政策之间的差距方面,你应该走多远呢?
Health Res Policy Syst. 2017 Apr 26;15(1):35. doi: 10.1186/s12961-017-0192-x.
2
Using media to impact health policy-making: an integrative systematic review.利用媒体影响卫生政策制定:一项综合性系统评价
Implement Sci. 2017 Apr 18;12(1):52. doi: 10.1186/s13012-017-0581-0.
3
Comparison of Research Framing Preferences and Information Use of State Legislators and Advocates Involved in Cancer Control, United States, 2012-2013.
在卫生系统改革举措的设计与实施过程中关注卫生公平:一项范围综述与框架构建
Int J Equity Health. 2025 Mar 11;24(1):68. doi: 10.1186/s12939-025-02436-z.
4
Visualising the voices of nursing: a co-designed video capturing the lived experiences of nurses in Northern Ireland during the COVID-19 pandemic.展现护理人员的心声:一部通过共同设计制作的视频,记录了新冠疫情期间北爱尔兰护士的真实经历。
BMC Nurs. 2025 Mar 3;24(1):237. doi: 10.1186/s12912-025-02881-9.
5
Creating demand for unmet needs: Agile Storytelling.为未满足的需求创造需求:敏捷故事讲述法。
Front Health Serv. 2024 Oct 31;4:1376695. doi: 10.3389/frhs.2024.1376695. eCollection 2024.
6
Towards a better understanding of mental health care delivery systems: From stories to system components.迈向对精神卫生保健服务系统的更好理解:从故事到系统组成部分。
Health Syst (Basingstoke). 2023 Jun 27;12(4):362-374. doi: 10.1080/20476965.2023.2229391. eCollection 2023.
7
Commercial provider staff experiences of the NHS low calorie diet programme pilot: a qualitative exploration of key barriers and facilitators.商业供应商员工对国民保健制度低卡路里饮食计划试点的体验:对主要障碍和促进因素的定性探索。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2024 Jan 10;24(1):53. doi: 10.1186/s12913-023-10501-y.
8
Audience Response to Research-Based Theater on the Societal Impact of COVID-19.观众对基于研究的戏剧对 COVID-19 社会影响的反应。
Am J Health Promot. 2024 Mar;38(3):412-426. doi: 10.1177/08901171231216204. Epub 2023 Nov 20.
9
'On paper, you're normal': narratives of unseen health needs among women who have had children removed from their care.“从纸面上看,你是正常的”:那些子女被剥夺抚养权的女性诉说着那些看不见的健康需求。
J Public Health (Oxf). 2023 Nov 29;45(4):863-869. doi: 10.1093/pubmed/fdad137.
10
Strategies for communicating scientific evidence on healthcare to managers and the population: a scoping review.向管理人员和公众传达医疗保健科学证据的策略:范围综述。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2023 Jul 10;21(1):71. doi: 10.1186/s12961-023-01017-2.
2012 - 2013年美国参与癌症控制的州立法者与倡导者的研究框架偏好及信息使用情况比较
Prev Chronic Dis. 2017 Feb 2;14:E10. doi: 10.5888/pcd14.160292.
4
Determinants of evidence use in public health policy making: Results from a study across six EU countries.公共卫生政策制定中证据使用的决定因素:一项涵盖六个欧盟国家的研究结果。
Health Policy. 2017 Mar;121(3):273-281. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2017.01.003. Epub 2017 Jan 20.
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
Realist complex intervention science: Applying realist principles across all phases of the Medical Research Council framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions.现实主义复杂干预科学:在医学研究理事会制定和评估复杂干预措施的框架的所有阶段应用现实主义原则。
Evaluation (Lond). 2016 Jul;22(3):286-303. doi: 10.1177/1356389016652743. Epub 2016 Jun 2.
7
Framing research for state policymakers who place a priority on cancer.为将癌症列为优先事项的州政策制定者构建研究框架。
Cancer Causes Control. 2016 Aug;27(8):1035-41. doi: 10.1007/s10552-016-0771-0. Epub 2016 Jun 14.
8
What factors affect evidence-informed policymaking in public health? Protocol for a systematic review of qualitative evidence using thematic synthesis.哪些因素会影响公共卫生领域基于证据的政策制定?一项使用主题综合法对定性证据进行系统评价的方案。
Syst Rev. 2016 Apr 14;5:61. doi: 10.1186/s13643-016-0240-6.
9
Enhancing evidence informed policymaking in complex health systems: lessons from multi-site collaborative approaches.加强复杂卫生系统中的循证决策:多地点协作方法的经验教训。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2016 Mar 17;14:20. doi: 10.1186/s12961-016-0089-0.
10
N-of-1 Policymaking--Tragedy, Trade-offs, and the Demise of Morcellation.单病例决策制定——悲剧、权衡与粉碎术的衰落
N Engl J Med. 2016 Mar 10;374(10):986-90. doi: 10.1056/NEJMms1516161.