Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London, WC1H 9SH, United Kingdom.
National Institute of Public Health, Trubarjeva 2, 1000, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Health Res Policy Syst. 2022 May 7;20(1):54. doi: 10.1186/s12961-022-00852-z.
Evidence briefs for policy (EBPs) represent a potentially powerful tool for supporting evidence-informed policy-making. Since 2012, WHO Evidence-Informed Policy Network (EVIPNet) Europe has been supporting Member States in developing EBPs. The aim of this study was to evaluate the process of developing EBPs in Estonia, Hungary and Slovenia.
We used a rapid appraisal approach, combining semi-structured interviews and document review, guided by the Medical Research Council (MRC) process evaluation framework. Interviews were conducted with a total of 20 individuals familiar with the EBP process in the three study countries. Data were analysed thematically, and emerging themes were related back to the MRC framework components (implementation, mechanisms of impact, and context). We also reflected on the appropriateness of this evaluation approach for EVIPNet teams without evaluation research expertise to conduct themselves.
The following themes emerged as important to the EBP development process: how the focus problem is prioritized, who initiates this process, EBP team composition, EBP team leadership, availability of external support in the process, and the culture of policy-making in a country. In particular, the EBP process seemed to be supported by early engagement of the Ministry of Health and other stakeholders as initiators, clear EBP team roles and expectations, including a strong leader, external support to strengthen EBP team capacity and cultural acceptance of the necessity of evidence-informed policy-making. Overall, the evaluation approach was considered feasible by the EBP teams and captured rich qualitative data, but may be limited by the absence of external reviewers and long lag times between the EBP process and the evaluation.
This process occurs in a complex system and must be conceptualized in each country and each EBP project in a way that fits local policy-making culture, priorities, leadership and team styles, roles and available resources. The use of a rapid appraisal approach, combining qualitative interviews and document review, is a feasible method of process evaluation for EVIPNet member countries.
证据简讯（EBPs）为支持循证决策提供了一种潜在的有力工具。自 2012 年以来，世界卫生组织循证决策网络（EVIPNet）欧洲一直在支持会员国制定 EBPs。本研究的目的是评估爱沙尼亚、匈牙利和斯洛文尼亚制定 EBPs 的过程。
我们采用快速评估方法，结合半结构化访谈和文件审查，以医学研究委员会（MRC）的过程评估框架为指导。对来自三个研究国家的共 20 名熟悉 EBP 过程的个人进行了访谈。对数据进行了主题分析，并将出现的主题与 MRC 框架组件（实施、影响机制和背景）联系起来。我们还反思了这种评估方法对于没有评估研究专业知识的 EVIPNet 团队来说是否合适。
以下主题被认为是 EBP 发展过程中的重要因素：如何优先考虑重点问题、谁启动这个过程、EBP 团队的组成、EBP 团队的领导、过程中是否有外部支持、以及国家的政策制定文化。特别是，EBP 过程似乎得到了卫生部和其他利益相关者的早期参与的支持，他们是发起者，EBP 团队的角色和期望明确，包括一个强有力的领导者，外部支持来加强 EBP 团队的能力和对循证决策的必要性的文化接受度。总的来说，EBP 团队认为这种评估方法是可行的，并获得了丰富的定性数据，但可能受到外部审查员的缺乏和 EBP 过程与评估之间的时间滞后的限制。
这个过程发生在一个复杂的系统中，必须在每个国家和每个 EBP 项目中进行概念化，以适应当地的政策制定文化、优先事项、领导和团队风格、角色和可用资源。使用快速评估方法，结合定性访谈和文件审查，是 EVIPNet 成员国进行过程评估的一种可行方法。
