Interventions encouraging the use of systematic reviews by health policymakers and managers: A systematic review

Implementation Science

Volumn 6, Issue 1, 2011, Pages

  Perrier, Laure ^a   Mrklas, Kelly ^b   Lavis, John N ^c   Straus, Sharon E ^d  

^a ST MICHAEL'S HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

^c MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^d ST MICHAEL'S HOSPITAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADMINISTRATIVE PERSONNEL; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HUMAN; LITERATURE; MANAGEMENT; METHODOLOGY; REVIEW; STATISTICS;

ADMINISTRATIVE PERSONNEL; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; POLICY MAKING; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC;

EID: 79955136527     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17485908     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1748-5908-6-43     Document Type: Review

References (22)

1. Brownson RC, Royer C, Ewing R, McBride TD. Researchers and policymakers: travelers in parallel universes. Am J Prev Med 2006, 30:164-172. 10.1016/j.amepre.2005.10.004, 16459216.
2. Browman GP, Snider A, Ellis P. Negotiating for change. The healthcare manager as catalyst for evidence-based practice: changing the healthcare environment and sharing experience. Healthc Pap 2003, 3:10-22.
3. Pope C, Mays N, Popay J. How can we synthesize qualitative and quantitative evidence for healthcare policy-makers and managers?. Healthc Manage Forum 2006, 19:27-31.
4. Cochrane Collaboration About Cochrane Reviews. Accessed September 27, 2010, Cochrane Collaboration., http://www.cochrane.org/about-us/evidence-based-health-care
5. Lavis J, Davies H, Oxman A, Denis JL, Golden-Biddle K, Ferlie E. Towards systematic reviews that inform health care management and policy-making. J Health Serv Res Policy 2005, 10(Suppl 1):35-48.
6. Lavis JN. How can we support the use of systematic reviews in policymaking?. PLoS Med 2009, 6:e1000141. 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000141, 2777391, 19936223.
7. Alper BS, Hand JA, Elliott SG, Kinkade S, Hauan MJ, Onion DK, Sklar BM. How much effort is needed to keep up with the literature relevant for primary care?. J Med Libr Assoc 2004, 92:429-437. 521514, 15494758.
8. Arksey H, O'Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 2005, 8:19-32.
9. Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Group: Data Abstraction form. Accessed September 27, 2010., http://epoc.cochrane.org/epoc-resources-review-authors
10. Berlin JA. Does blinding of readers affect the results of meta-analyses? University of Pennsylvania Meta-analysis Blinding Study Group. Lancet 1997, 350:185-186.
11. Kjaergard LL, Villumsen J, Gluud C. Reported methodologic quality and discrepancies between large and small randomized trials in meta-analyses. Ann Intern Med 2001, 135:982-989.
12. Downs SH, Black N. The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health 1998, 52:377-84. 10.1136/jech.52.6.377, 1756728, 9764259.
13. Adamo KB, Prince SA, Tricco AC, Connor-Gorber S, Tremblay M. A comparison of indirect versus direct measures for assessing physical activity in the pediatric population: a systematic review. Int J Pediatr Obes 2009, 4:2-27. 10.1080/17477160802315010, 18720173.
14. Ciliska D, Hayward S, Dobbins M, Brunton G, Underwood J. Transferring public-health nursing research to health-system planning: Assessing the relevance and accessibility of systematic reviews. Canadian Journal of Nursing Research 1999, 31:23-36.
15. Dobbins M, Cockerill R, Barnsley J. Factors affecting the utilization of systematic reviews. A study of public health decision makers. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 2001, 17:203-214. 10.1017/S0266462300105069, 11446132.
16. Dobbins M, Cockerill R, Barnsley J, Ciliska D. Factors of the innovation, organization, environment, and individual that predict the influence five systematic reviews had on public health decisions. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 2001, 17:467-478.
17. Dobbins M, Hanna SE, Ciliska D, Manske S, Cameron R, Mercer SL, O'Mara L, DeCorby K, Robeson P. A randomized controlled trial evaluating the impact of knowledge translation and exchange strategies. Implement Sci 2009, 4:61. 10.1186/1748-5908-4-61, 2936828, 19775439.
18. Best Evidence Medical Education Collaboration: Guide for topic review groups on carrying out BEME systematic reviews, version 2. Information for prospective topic review groups 2003,
19. Arksey H, O'Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 2005, 8:19-32.
20. Dobbins M, Jack S, Thomas H, Kothari A. Public health decision-makers' informational needs and preferences for receiving research evidence. Worldviews Evid Based Nurs 2007, 4:156-63. 10.1111/j.1741-6787.2007.00089.x, 17850496.
21. Nelson CE, Roberts J, Maederer CM, Wertheimer B, Johnson B. The utilization of social science information by policymakers. American Behavioral Scientist 1987, 30:569.
22. Lomas J. Using research to inform healthcare managers' and policy makers' questions: from summative to interpretive synthesis. Healthcare Policy 2005, 1:55-71. 2585236, 19308103.