Woodall James, Bracewell Chloe, Passey Andrew, Start Samantha, South Jane
School of Health, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, LS1 3HE, UK.
Wakefield Metropolitan District Council, Wakefield, WF1, UK.
BMC Public Health. 2025 Jul 15;25(1):2461. doi: 10.1186/s12889-025-23705-0.
Local authorities in England are ideally placed to address the social determinants of health in the communities they serve. An evidence-led approach to developing programmes and policies to tackle determinants of health is critical to ensuring outcomes are attained and resources are used appropriately. Previous studies though suggest that local authorities do not always use evidence consistently in their decision-making processes. This paper seeks therefore to explore perceived research capability and capacity across one local authority in northern England to understand how research influences policy and practice.
A qualitative exploration of 29 leaders and managers across the local authority, representing the four directorates of the organisation, was obtained to gain an overall understanding of research capacity and capability. Data were analysed thematically with eight overarching thematic categories derived.
The capacity and capability for research across the local authority directorates varied. Some participants described departments within directorates as being research active where research was part of their core business. Conversely, some departments were engaged in front-line service delivery where research was not prioritised. In these areas there was a disconnect between daily working practices and research. Staff in these departments generally lacked skills and training in research, whereas those in research active areas often had professional training where research was incorporated. There was rarely a shared definition of research by participants and ambiguity in what constituted research was common. The local authority was perceived to gather lots of data, but this was often used very functionally to fulfil reporting obligations. Curiosity to explore data was often minimised due to work pressures. Links from local authority staff to democratically elected officials varied and research and evidence was not always routinely presented. The majority of participants recognised that reforming ways of working and developing a clear training offer around research would be beneficial to addressing health outcomes.
Data demonstrated variance between research practice, partnerships and culture in departments where space for intellectual curiosity was tempered by service demands. There were exceptions to this, where departmental views of research were positive and leaders valued the research-informed culture.
英格兰地方当局在解决其服务社区的健康社会决定因素方面具有得天独厚的条件。采用以证据为导向的方法来制定解决健康决定因素的方案和政策，对于确保实现预期成果和合理使用资源至关重要。然而，先前的研究表明，地方当局在决策过程中并不总是始终如一地使用证据。因此，本文旨在探讨英格兰北部一个地方当局的研究能力和水平，以了解研究如何影响政策和实践。
对该地方当局的29名领导人和管理人员进行了定性探索，他们代表了该组织的四个部门，以全面了解研究能力和水平。对数据进行了主题分析，得出了八个总体主题类别。
地方当局各部门的研究能力和水平各不相同。一些参与者将部门内的某些部门描述为积极开展研究，研究是其核心业务的一部分。相反，一些部门从事一线服务提供，研究未被列为优先事项。在这些领域，日常工作实践与研究之间存在脱节。这些部门的工作人员通常缺乏研究技能和培训，而积极开展研究的领域的工作人员往往接受过将研究纳入其中的专业培训。参与者很少对研究有共同的定义，对什么构成研究存在模糊认识是很常见的。地方当局被认为收集了大量数据，但这些数据通常非常实用地用于履行报告义务。由于工作压力，探索数据的好奇心往往被降至最低。地方当局工作人员与民选官员的联系各不相同，研究和证据并不总是定期提交。大多数参与者认识到，改革工作方式并围绕研究提供明确的培训，将有助于改善健康结果。
数据表明，在服务需求抑制了求知欲的部门中，研究实践、伙伴关系和文化存在差异。也有例外情况，有些部门对研究的看法是积极的，领导重视基于研究的文化。
