• 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

设想并推动知识转化为行动:欧洲烟草控制工具开发中利益相关者参与的比较案例研究

Envisioning and shaping translation of knowledge into action: A comparative case-study of stakeholder engagement in the development of a European tobacco control tool.

作者信息

Borst Robert A J, Kok Maarten Olivier, O'Shea Alison J, Pokhrel Subhash, Jones Teresa H, Boaz Annette

机构信息

Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, P.O. Box 1738, 3000 DR, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.

Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, P.O. Box 1738, 3000 DR, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1085, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

出版信息

Health Policy. 2019 Oct;123(10):917-923. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2019.07.012. Epub 2019 Jul 20.

DOI:10.1016/j.healthpol.2019.07.012
PMID:31383372
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6876657/
Abstract

Stakeholder engagement in health policy research is often said to increase 'research impact', but the active role of stakeholders in creating impact remains underexplored. We explored how stakeholders shaped the translation of health policy research into action. Our comparative case-study tracked a European research project that aimed to transfer an existing tobacco control return on investment tool. That project also aimed to increase its impact by engaging with stakeholders in further developing the tool. We conducted semi-structured interviews, using an actor-scenario mapping approach. Actor-scenarios can be seen as relational descriptions of a future world. We mapped the scenarios by asking stakeholders to describe who and what would play a role in the tool's utilisation. Our results show that stakeholders envisioned disparate futures for the tool. Some scenarios were specific, whereas most were generic projections of abstract potential users and responsibilities. We show how stakeholders mobilised elements of context, such as legislative support and agricultural practice, that would affect the tool's use. We conclude that stakeholders shape knowledge translation processes by continuously putting forth explicit or implicit scenarios about the future. Mapping actor-scenarios may help in aligning knowledge production with utilisation. Insights into potential roles and responsibilities could be fed back in research projects with the aim of increasing the likelihood that the study results may be used.

摘要

利益相关者参与卫生政策研究通常被认为会增加“研究影响力”,但利益相关者在产生影响力方面的积极作用仍未得到充分探索。我们探讨了利益相关者如何将卫生政策研究转化为行动。我们的比较案例研究追踪了一个欧洲研究项目,该项目旨在推广一种现有的烟草控制投资回报工具。该项目还旨在通过与利益相关者合作进一步开发该工具来提高其影响力。我们采用参与者情景映射方法进行了半结构化访谈。参与者情景可以被视为对未来世界的关系描述。我们通过要求利益相关者描述谁以及什么将在该工具的使用中发挥作用来绘制情景。我们的结果表明,利益相关者设想了该工具截然不同的未来。一些情景是具体的,而大多数是对抽象潜在用户和责任的一般预测。我们展示了利益相关者如何调动背景因素,如立法支持和农业实践,这些因素将影响该工具的使用。我们得出结论,利益相关者通过不断提出关于未来的明确或隐含情景来塑造知识转化过程。绘制参与者情景可能有助于使知识生产与利用保持一致。对潜在角色和责任的洞察可以反馈到研究项目中,以提高研究结果被使用的可能性。

相似文献

1
Envisioning and shaping translation of knowledge into action: A comparative case-study of stakeholder engagement in the development of a European tobacco control tool.设想并推动知识转化为行动:欧洲烟草控制工具开发中利益相关者参与的比较案例研究
Health Policy. 2019 Oct;123(10):917-923. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2019.07.012. Epub 2019 Jul 20.
2
Similarities and differences between stakeholders' opinions on using Health Technology Assessment (HTA) information across five European countries: results from the EQUIPT survey.五个欧洲国家利益相关者对使用卫生技术评估(HTA)信息的意见异同:EQUIPT调查结果
Health Res Policy Syst. 2016 May 26;14(1):38. doi: 10.1186/s12961-016-0110-7.
3
Evaluating stakeholder involvement in building a decision support tool for NHS health checks: co-producing the WorkHORSE study.评估利益相关者在为国民保健制度健康检查构建决策支持工具方面的参与情况:共同开展 WorkHORSE 研究。
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2020 Aug 10;20(1):182. doi: 10.1186/s12911-020-01205-y.
4
Role of stakeholders in Nigeria's tobacco control journey after the FCTC: lessons for tobacco control advocacy in low-income and middle-income countries.利益相关者在尼日利亚《烟草控制框架公约》后的烟草控制之旅中的作用:对低收入和中等收入国家烟草控制宣传的启示。
Tob Control. 2019 Jul;28(4):386-393. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2018-054344. Epub 2018 Jul 25.
5
Stakeholders' engagement in co-producing policy-relevant knowledge to facilitate employment for persons with developmental disabilities.利益相关者参与共同制定与政策相关的知识,以促进发展性残疾人士的就业。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2020 Apr 17;18(1):39. doi: 10.1186/s12961-020-00548-2.
6
Stakeholder engagement in European brain research: Experiences of the Lifebrain consortium.利益相关者参与欧洲脑研究:Lifebrain 联盟的经验。
Health Expect. 2023 Jun;26(3):1318-1326. doi: 10.1111/hex.13747. Epub 2023 Mar 29.
7
Why is tobacco control progress in Indonesia stalled? - a qualitative analysis of interviews with tobacco control experts.为什么印度尼西亚的控烟工作进展停滞不前?——对控烟专家访谈的定性分析。
BMC Public Health. 2020 Apr 19;20(1):527. doi: 10.1186/s12889-020-08640-6.
8
Government coordination of the Tobacco Control Policy in Brazil.巴西烟草控制政策的政府协调。
Cien Saude Colet. 2019 Jul 22;24(7):2701-2714. doi: 10.1590/1413-81232018247.22972017.
9
European Union implementation of Article 5.3 of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control.欧盟执行《烟草控制框架公约》第 5.3 条。
Global Health. 2018 Aug 2;14(1):79. doi: 10.1186/s12992-018-0386-1.
10
The impact of the treaty basis on health policy legislation in the European Union: a case study on the tobacco advertising directive.条约基础对欧盟卫生政策立法的影响:以烟草广告指令为例的研究
BMC Health Serv Res. 2008 Apr 8;8:77. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-8-77.

引用本文的文献

1
Making intersectoral stakeholder engagement in medicine quality research work: lessons from the STARmeds study in Indonesia.推动跨部门利益相关者参与医学质量研究工作:来自印度尼西亚STARmeds研究的经验教训。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2025 Feb 19;23(1):21. doi: 10.1186/s12961-025-01286-z.
2
What is context in knowledge translation? Results of a systematic scoping review.知识转化中的语境是什么?系统范围综述的结果。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2024 Apr 29;22(1):52. doi: 10.1186/s12961-024-01143-5.
3
What makes knowledge translation work in practice? Lessons from a demand-driven and locally led project in Cameroon, Jordan and Nigeria.是什么使得知识转化在实践中发挥作用?来自喀麦隆、约旦和尼日利亚一个需求驱动和本地主导的项目的经验教训。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2023 Dec 4;21(1):127. doi: 10.1186/s12961-023-01083-6.
4
Health workforce governance and professions: a re-analysis of New Zealand's primary care workforce policy actors.卫生人力治理与职业:新西兰初级保健劳动力政策行为体的再分析。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2023 May 7;23(1):449. doi: 10.1186/s12913-023-09459-8.
5
Does the process of developing products for knowledge mobilisation from healthcare research influence their uptake? A comparative case study.从医疗保健研究中开发用于知识传播的产品的过程会影响其采用情况吗?一项比较案例研究。
Implement Sci Commun. 2022 Dec 14;3(1):132. doi: 10.1186/s43058-022-00360-9.
6
Barriers to evidence use for sustainability: Insights from pesticide policy and practice.阻碍可持续发展证据使用的因素:来自农药政策和实践的启示。
Ambio. 2023 Feb;52(2):425-439. doi: 10.1007/s13280-022-01790-4. Epub 2022 Nov 17.
7
Using a Rapid Knowledge Translation Approach for Better Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights in Bangladesh, Burundi, Indonesia, and Jordan.利用快速知识转化方法改善孟加拉国、布隆迪、印度尼西亚和约旦的性健康和生殖健康及权利
Glob Health Sci Pract. 2022 Apr 29;10(2). doi: 10.9745/GHSP-D-21-00461. Print 2022 Apr 28.
8
Participatory codesign of patient involvement in a Learning Health System: How can data-driven care be patient-driven care?参与式设计让患者参与学习型医疗体系:如何实现数据驱动型医疗服务向患者驱动型医疗服务的转变?
Health Expect. 2022 Feb;25(1):103-115. doi: 10.1111/hex.13345. Epub 2021 Oct 20.
9
More than a method: trusting relationships, productive tensions, and two-way learning as mechanisms of authentic co-production.不止是一种方法:信任关系、建设性冲突以及双向学习作为真正共同生产的机制
Res Involv Engagem. 2021 May 31;7(1):34. doi: 10.1186/s40900-021-00262-5.
10
Stakeholder-engaged process for refining the design of a clinical trial in home hospice.利益相关者参与的临床试验设计改进过程在家居临终关怀中。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2021 Apr 30;21(1):92. doi: 10.1186/s12874-021-01275-0.

本文引用的文献

1
The dark side of coproduction: do the costs outweigh the benefits for health research?共同生产的阴暗面:对于健康研究来说,其成本是否超过了收益?
Health Res Policy Syst. 2019 Mar 28;17(1):33. doi: 10.1186/s12961-019-0432-3.
2
How to engage stakeholders in research: design principles to support improvement.如何让利益相关者参与研究:支持改进的设计原则。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2018 Jul 11;16(1):60. doi: 10.1186/s12961-018-0337-6.
3
Understanding perceived availability and importance of tobacco control interventions to inform European adoption of a UK economic model: a cross-sectional study.了解烟草控制干预措施的可感知可用性和重要性,以为欧洲采用英国经济模式提供参考:一项横断面研究。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 Feb 14;18(1):115. doi: 10.1186/s12913-018-2923-2.
4
Evidence-based policy as reflexive practice. What can we learn from evidence-based medicine?循证政策即反思性实践。我们能从循证医学中学到什么?
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2017 Apr;22(2):113-119. doi: 10.1177/1355819616670680. Epub 2016 Oct 15.
5
Which health research gets used and why? An empirical analysis of 30 cases.哪些健康研究被采用以及原因何在?对30个案例的实证分析。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2016 May 17;14(1):36. doi: 10.1186/s12961-016-0107-2.
6
Health and medical research funding agencies' promotion of public engagement within research: a qualitative interview study exploring the United Kingdom context.健康与医学研究资助机构在研究中对公众参与的推动:一项探索英国背景的定性访谈研究
Health Res Policy Syst. 2016 Mar 24;14:23. doi: 10.1186/s12961-016-0093-4.
7
The Association Between Tobacco Control Policy and Educational Inequalities in Smoking Cessation in the Netherlands from 1988 Through 2011.1988 年至 2011 年荷兰控烟政策与戒烟教育不平等之间的关系。
Nicotine Tob Res. 2015 Nov;17(11):1369-76. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntv004. Epub 2015 Jan 12.
8
EQUIPT: protocol of a comparative effectiveness research study evaluating cross-context transferability of economic evidence on tobacco control.EQUIPT:一项比较效果研究的方案,评估烟草控制经济证据的跨背景可转移性。
BMJ Open. 2014 Nov 24;4(11):e006945. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006945.
9
Conferences, tablecloths and cupboards: how to understand the situatedness of quality improvements in long-term care.会议、台布和橱柜:如何理解长期护理中的质量改进的情境性。
Soc Sci Med. 2013 Feb;78:78-85. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.11.037. Epub 2012 Dec 10.
10
A critical second look at integrated knowledge translation.再看一眼综合知识转化。
Health Policy. 2013 Feb;109(2):187-91. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2012.11.004. Epub 2012 Dec 8.