Suppr超能文献

公民社会在卫生政策决策中的证据生成作用:全民医疗保健信息(HIFA)社区在线讨论的主题分析

Civil Society's Evidence-Generating Role for Health Policy Decisions: A Thematic Analysis of a Healthcare Information for All (HIFA) Community Online Discussion.

作者信息

Gopinathan Unni, Asoka Tarry, Aponte-Rueda María Eugenia, Aryeteey Genevieve Cecilia, Chaudhuri Esha Ray, Cherian Meena, Devarsetty Praveen, Glenton Claire, Koduah Augustina, Gupta Tripti, Lewin Simon, Nzinga Jacinta, Perumal-Pillay Velisha Ann, Ram Ravi, Suleman Fatima, Zangana Goran Abdulla, Pakenham-Walsh Neil Martin

机构信息

Cluster for Global Health, Division for Health Services, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.

Centre for Epidemic Interventions Research, Division for Health Services, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.

出版信息

Int J Health Policy Manag. 2025;14:8701. doi: 10.34172/ijhpm.8701. Epub 2025 Jul 12.

Abstract

Civil society actors are widely recognized for advocating the public interest in health policy. However, their role in contributing different types of evidence to inform policy is less explored. To explore this topic, members of the Healthcare Information for All (HIFA) online forum and the (SUPPORT-SYSTEMS) research project conducted a four-week online discussion. The discussion focused on defining civil society, its role in health policy, the types of evidence it provides, and how this evidence is used and valued. Weekly focal questions encouraged HIFA members to share experiences of civil society engagement and the use of evidence in health policy-making. The thematic analysis identified four key messages. First, defining civil society requires critical reflection, as actors differ significantly in their interests, political ties, and influence. These distinctions affect how representative their evidence is and whether it reflects vested interests. Second, policy-making structures can support meaningful civil society participation, thereby strengthening the use of evidence and the legitimacy of policy decisions. Third, civil society provides valuable local and tacit knowledge that complements scientific evidence, though safeguards are needed to prevent bias or misrepresentation. Fourth, political economy factors-such as power imbalances, gatekeeping, and funding constraints-shape the influence of civil society evidence on policy. Overall, the discussion highlighted the diverse roles civil society can play in health policy and the importance of institutional mechanisms to support responsible evidence use. Thematic discussions in communities of practice (CoPs) like HIFA offer a dynamic and inclusive approach to engaging stakeholder knowledge in research projects.

摘要

民间社会行为体在倡导卫生政策中的公共利益方面得到广泛认可。然而,它们在提供不同类型的证据以指导政策方面所发挥的作用却较少得到探讨。为了探究这一主题,全民医疗信息(HIFA)在线论坛的成员以及“支持系统”(SUPPORT - SYSTEMS)研究项目开展了为期四周的在线讨论。该讨论聚焦于界定民间社会、其在卫生政策中的作用、它所提供的证据类型,以及这些证据是如何被使用和重视的。每周的重点问题促使HIFA成员分享民间社会参与的经验以及证据在卫生政策制定中的使用情况。主题分析确定了四条关键信息。第一,界定民间社会需要进行批判性反思,因为行为体在其利益、政治联系和影响力方面存在显著差异。这些差异影响其证据的代表性以及是否反映既得利益。第二,决策结构能够支持民间社会有意义的参与,从而加强证据的使用以及政策决策的合法性。第三,民间社会提供了宝贵的地方性和隐性知识,对科学证据起到补充作用,不过需要采取保障措施以防止偏见或失实陈述。第四,政治经济因素,如权力失衡、把关和资金限制,塑造了民间社会证据对政策的影响。总体而言,该讨论突出了民间社会在卫生政策中可以发挥的多样作用以及支持负责任地使用证据的制度机制的重要性。像HIFA这样的实践社区(CoPs)中的主题讨论提供了一种动态且包容的方法,使利益相关者的知识参与到研究项目中。

相似文献

4
Healthcare workers' informal uses of mobile phones and other mobile devices to support their work: a qualitative evidence synthesis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Aug 27;8(8):CD015705. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD015705.pub2.
5
Advocacy for health equity: a synthesis review.
Milbank Q. 2015 Jun;93(2):392-437. doi: 10.1111/1468-0009.12112.
7
The Political Economy of the World Health Organization Model Lists of Essential Medicines.
Milbank Q. 2025 Mar;103(1):52-99. doi: 10.1111/1468-0009.70001. Epub 2025 Feb 27.
9
How to Implement Digital Clinical Consultations in UK Maternity Care: the ARM@DA Realist Review.
Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2025 May 21:1-77. doi: 10.3310/WQFV7425.
10
Health professionals' experience of teamwork education in acute hospital settings: a systematic review of qualitative literature.
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2016 Apr;14(4):96-137. doi: 10.11124/JBISRIR-2016-1843.

本文引用的文献

1
Using an online community of practice to explore the informal use of mobile phones by health workers.
Oxf Open Digit Health. 2023 Jan 4;1:oqac003. doi: 10.1093/oodh/oqac003. eCollection 2023.
2
Using evidence from civil society in national and subnational health policy processes: a qualitative evidence synthesis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Jun 20;6(6):CD015810. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD015810.
4
Procedural fairness in health financing for universal health coverage: why, what and how.
Health Policy Plan. 2023 Nov 14;38(Supplement_1):i1-i4. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czad069.
6
Improving facility-based care: eliciting tacit knowledge to advance intervention design.
BMJ Glob Health. 2022 Aug;7(8). doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2022-009410.
8
The politics of universal health coverage.
Lancet. 2022 May 28;399(10340):2066-2074. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00585-2. Epub 2022 May 17.
9
Healthcare information for all.
BMJ. 2020 Feb 28;368:m759. doi: 10.1136/bmj.m759.
10
Patient and public involvement: Two sides of the same coin or different coins altogether?
Bioethics. 2019 Jul;33(6):708-715. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12584. Epub 2019 Apr 8.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验