Research in Practice is a column in the Evidence Based Library and Information Practice journal, published quarterly.

In the ever-evolving landscape of health systems, citizen advocacy stands as a tool for influencing policy aiming to strengthen health systems. This dissertation delves into the multifaceted nature of health policy advocacy and how citizen advocates can leverage research evidence in addition to the commonly used emotional messaging to influence policy. The first study is a critical interpretive synthesis (CIS), creating a theoretical framework that helps us understand the roles of citizen health policy advocates and their relation to research evidence. The second study is a multiple-case study that examines the approaches taken by citizen-serving NGOs in their advocacy training and whether and how research evidence is incorporated into the training. The third study is a qualitative descriptive study that explores citizens' experiences participating in these training modules and their perceptions of factors affecting the incorporation of research evidence in the training. In Chapter 2, we included 32 publications in the CIS, and four thematic groups were identified, including the roles of citizen health policy advocates, how research evidence could support them and the facilitators and barriers to their use of research evidence. In Chapter 3, we conducted a documentary review of 27 documents and interviewed 16 staff and board members of three organizations that provide advocacy training to citizen advocates. In Chapter 3, we interviewed 14 citizens who participated in the training of the three organizations. v The first study outlined how citizens could use research evidence and its importance to their advocacy roles, while the last two studies provide an understanding of how citizen-serving organizations offer training to citizen advocates and whether, how, and under what conditions they include research evidence in training. / Thesis / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) / Advocacy is an effective way to influence policies in democratic societies. One of those areas that are influenced by policy advocacy is health systems. Citizens who advocate for improving their health systems often rely on personal emotional messages rather than peer-reviewed research evidence. This dissertation tries to understand why this is the case and how research evidence can support those citizens. We also explore the factors that encourage or hinder citizens from using research evidence in health policy advocacy. We then examine three citizen-serving organizations that support citizens with advocacy training and explore how they support the trainees to use research evidence in advocacy. We also examine the experiences of citizens who participated in those training sessions and how they perceive the utility of research evidence in their advocacy to strengthen their health systems.

Background Selective reporting of outcomes within a published study based on their nature or direction can result in systematic differences between reported and unreported data. Direct evidence of outcome reporting bias is limited to case reports. Objective To study empirically the nature of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Methods Three cohorts of RCTs were identified: PubMed-indexed RCTs published in December 2000; trial protocols approved by a Danish ethics committee from 1994-95; and trial protocols funded by a government agency in Canada from 1990-98. Data on reported and unreported outcomes were recorded from all trial publications and a survey of authors. An outcome was considered incompletely reported if insufficient data were presented for meta-analysis. Odds ratios relating the completeness of outcome reporting to statistical significance were calculated for each trial, and then pooled using a random effects meta-analysis. Protocols and publications were also reviewed for discrepancies in primary outcome reporting. Results 519 trials with 10,557 outcomes, 102 trials with 3613 outcomes, and 48 trials with 1390 outcomes were identified for the PubMed, ethics committee, and funding agency cohorts respectively. 22%-35% of outcomes per parallel group study were, on average, incompletely reported for meta-analysis. Fully reported outcomes had a two- to three-fold higher odds of being statistically significant compared to incompletely reported outcomes. The most common reasons given for omitting outcomes included a lack of clinical importance, lack of statistical significance, and space constraints. Major discrepancies between primary outcomes in protocols and publications were found in one half of trials. Discussion and conclusions The reporting of trial outcomes is frequently inadequate for meta-analysis; is biased to favour statistical significance; and is inconsistent with pre-specified protocol outcomes. Unacknowledged modifications to outcomes specified in trial protocols constitute scientific misconduct. Meta-analyses may therefore produce inflated and unreliable estimates of treatment effect.

Is public health policy based on scholarly evidence? With the manifold variables that policy makers must consider, is evidence-based policy even realistic? While strategies exist to translate research into policy, a need to understand better how that can play out in real-life remains. Using interviews from informants occupying a range of positions, and considering the atmosphere created by media reports, this study examines the case of smoking privileges at East Coast Forensic Hospital. After a patient committed murder while on leave, apparently to smoke, public pressure over public safety, a relative lack of relevant scholarship, ethical considerations, and the divergent voices of stakeholders created challenging circumstances for policy makers. Through the use of case study methodology, this project identifies the kinds of information that are employed in the creation or modification of policy and offers insights concerning how the influences exerted on policy makers determine how information is employed.

Diss. (sammanfattning) Linköping : Univ., 2004. / Härtill 5 uppsatser.

<p><strong>Research objectives</strong>: 1) Develop an online repository of policy-relevant documents addressing healthcare renewal in Canada; and 2) describe the general contents of policy-relevant documents addressing healthcare renewal in Canada. <strong>Methods</strong>: The methods for this study were iteratively developed using an approach similar to a scoping review. Documents were identified through website hand-searches and sixteen Canadian health organizations that contributed to the development of the online repository. The majority of organizations are government health ministries/departments or government-supported health organizations. The focus of the analysis was to calculate general descriptive frequencies of the distribution of documents included in the online repository, specifically: 1) the general characteristics of the documents, such as document type, publication year and jurisdictional focus; 2) document themes by national priority areas; 3) document themes by health system topics; and 4) contributing organizations. <strong>Results</strong>: A total of 304 documents were coded for inclusion in the online repository<br />(<a href="http://eihrportal.org/">http://eihrportal.org</a>). The Health Council of Canada contributed the largest amount of documents (n=60, 19%). The top three types of documents are health and health system data (n=75, 25%), situation analysis (n=72, 24%) and jurisdictional review (n=49, 16%). The top three national priority areas addressed in the documents are health human resources (n=270, 89%), quality as a performance indicator (n=210, 69%) and information technology (n=183, 60%). The least commonly addressed national priority areas are technology assessment (n=19, 6%), prescription drug coverage (n=68, 22%) and Aboriginal health (n=87, 29%). <strong>Conclusion</strong>: The process of developing a systematic method for identifying policy-relevant documents and retrieving useful information from these documents can be reproduced by anyone interested in using this type of evidence to inform their health policymaking. A number of implications exist for policy and research, both in Canada and in low- and middle-income countries, which have to be considered in relation to the unique nature of this type of evidence.</p> / Master of Science (MSc)

This applied research project responds to a critical problem in health and development: how to effectively translate our research evidence to the communities with and for whom we work in order to stimulate successful, sustainable health promotion activities and social change. The tangible product of this research is a handbook for health and outreach workers from immigrant communities from the Horn of Africa living in Toronto. The handbook is a resource which will be used as a starting point for the generation of community-based health initiatives, in this case, HIV/AIDS prevention programs. The research applies a conceptual approach which emphasizes participatory action research theory and methodology, and equitable, transcontextual research partnerships. It uses a model which merges both scientific evidence and experiential (ethnographic) evidence of risk and vulnerability to create new understandings on which to base the development of health programs. Stories, grounded in ethnographic evidence, are at the heart of the research strategy. The handbook is an example of experimental ethnographic writing: dialogue is used to communicate research evidence, health, and skills information; and a number of personal narrative:s have been constructed as resources to help health workers generate dialogue on issues of risk and vulnerability, and begin a process of reflection and action. In a larger context, the lessons learned as this work is implemented and evaluated in the community will contribute to the knowledge of intervention science. The research also serves as an example of ethical anthropology and raises for discussion ethnography's future project at the tum of the century. With attention to how anthropologists represent their work, 'moral ethnography' can serve a larger human project, helping us better understand what it is to be human and stimulating moral conversations about how we want to live. / Thesis / Master of Arts (MA)

Yes / Introduction: Evidence based practice relies on availability of research evidence mostly through peer-reviewed journal publications. No consensus currently exists on the best hierarchy of research evidence, often categorised by the adopted research designs. Analysing the prevalent research designs in radiography professional journals is one vital step in considering an evidence hierarchy specific to the radiography profession and this forms the aim of this study. Methods: Bibliometric data of publications in three Radiography professional journals within a 10-year period were extracted. The Digital Object Identifier were used to locate papers on publishers' websites and obtain relevant data for analysis. Descriptive analysis using frequencies and percentages were used to represent data while Chi-square was used to analyse relationship between categorical variables. Results: 1830 articles met the pre-set inclusion criteria. Quantitative descriptive studies were the most published design (26.6%) followed by non-RCT experimental studies (18.7%), while Randomised Controlled Trials (RCT) were the least published (1.0%). Systematic reviews (42.9%) showed the highest average percentage increase within the 10-year period, however RCTs showed no net increase. Single-centre studies predominated among experimental studies (RCT = 88.9%; Non-RCT = 95%). Author collaboration across all study designs was notable, with RCTs showing the most (100%). Quantitative and qualitative studies comparatively had similar number of citations when publication numbers were matched. Quantitative descriptive studies had the highest cumulative citations while RCTs had the least. Conclusion: There is a case to advocate for more study designs towards the peak of evidence hierarchies such as systematic reviews and RCT. Radiography research should be primarily designed to answer pertinent questions and improve the validity of the profession's evidence base. Implication for practice The evidence presented can encourage the adoption of the research designs that enhances radiography profession's evidence base. / The full-text of this article will be released for public view at the end of the publisher embargo on 20 June 2025.

Background: Little is known about the use of pain management evidence in Jordanian Pediatric Intensive Care Units (PICUs). Purpose: To assess the existence, content, and the factors influencing the use of pain management evidence in Jordanian PICUs. Methods: Three studies were guided by the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARiHS) framework. 1. A scoping review of the literature to identify pain management interventions in the PICU; 2. A cross-sectional and multisite survey to determine the current pain management practices, and the availability and content of practice guidelines in Jordanian PICUs; 3. A correlational and multisite survey to examine the relationship between the contextual factors and nurses’ use of pain management research evidence in Jordanian PICUs. Results: 1. Twenty-seven studies were included in the scoping review. The majority of the studies focused mainly on pharmacological interventions (n= 21, 78%). Morphine and fentanyl were the most commonly used pharmacological agents for pain management in the PICUs. The use of non-pharmacological interventions was limited. 2. Four of six eligible PICUs participated in the cross-sectional study. All four units had written pain management guidelines. Fentanyl was the most commonly used pharmacological agent in two units. Intravenous infusions of opioids were not administered for patients on mechanical ventilation in two units. The use of non-pharmacological interventions was reported in one unit. 3. From the four participating units, 73 nurses completed the correlation study survey. Social capital predicted both the instrumental and conceptual research use for pain management by Jordanian PICU nurses. Structural and electronic resources predicted the instrumental research use for pain management by Jordanian PICU nurses. Conclusions: Pain management practices and supporting guidelines varied in Jordanian PICUs. Context influences Jordanian PICU nurses’ use of research for pain management. Not all of the pain management practices in Jordan are evidence informed. There is an opportunity for improvement in pain management in Jordanian PICUs.

No description available.