Evidence-based policy as reflexive practice. What can we learn from evidence-based medicine?

Journal of Health Services Research and Policy

Volumn 22, Issue 2, 2017, Pages 113-119

  Bal, Roland ^a  

^a ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Evidence based medicine; Evidence based policy; Reflexivity

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; GENERAL PRACTITIONER; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HEALTH CARE PRACTICE; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; MANAGEMENT; MEDICAL PRACTICE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT; TREATMENT OUTCOME; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; POLICY; PROCEDURES; STANDARDS; TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCH;

EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; POLICY; POLICY MAKING; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; TRANSLATIONAL MEDICAL RESEARCH;

EID: 85017659414     PISSN: 13558196     EISSN: 17581060     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1355819616670680     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Stolk EA, Brouwer WBF and Busschbach JJV. Rationalising rationing: economic and other considerations in the debate about funding of Viagra. Health Pol 2002; 59: 53–63.
2. Bal R. Met common sense komen we er niet. Zorgvisie, http://www.zorgvisie.nl/Kwaliteit/Verdieping/2013/1/Met-common-sense-komen-we-er-niet-1157655W/(2013).
3. Oldenhof L, Postma J and Bal R. Re-placing care: governing health care through spatial arrangements. In: Ferlie E, Montgomery K and Reff Pedersen A (eds) Handbook of healthcare management. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016.
4. Bal R. De nieuwe zichtbaarheid. Sturing in tijden van markt-werking. Rotterdam: Erasmus MC, 2008.
5. Quartz J, Wallenburg I and Bal R. The performativity of rankings. On the organizational effects of hospital league tables. Rotterdam: iBMG, 2013.
6. Schippers E. Het jaar van de transparantie. Den Haag: Ministerie van VWS, 2015 2 maart 2015. Report no. 723160-133094-MC.
7. Jasanoff S. Designs on nature. Science and democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2005.
8. Bijker WE, Bal R and Hendriks R. Paradox of scientific authority. The role of scientific advice in democracies. Boston: MIT Press, 2009.
9. Dobrow MJ, Goel V and Upshur REG. Evidence-based health policy: context and utilisation. Soc Sci Med 2004; 58: 207–217.
10. Armstrong D. Clinical autonomy, individual and collective: the problem of changing doctors’ behaviour. Soc Sci Med 2002; 55: 1771–1777.
11. Timmermans S and Mauck A. The promises and pittfalls of evidence-based medicine. Health Affair 2005; 24: 18–28.
12. Chalmers I. If evidence-informed policy works in practice, does it matter if it doesn’t work in theory? Evidence Pol 2005; 1: 227–242.
13. Walshe K and Rundall TG. Evidence-based management: from theory to practice in health care. Milbank Quarter 2001; 79: 429–457.
14. Timmermans S and Berg M. The Gold Standard. The challenge of evidence-based medicine and standardization in health care. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press, 2003.
15. Kok MO, Vaandrager L, Bal R, et al. Practitioner opinions on health promotion interventions that work: opening the ‘black box’ of a linear evidence-based approach. Soc Sci Med 2012; 74: 715–723.
16. Dehue T. Testing treatments, managing life: on the history of randomized clinical trials. His Hum Sci 1999; 12: 115–124.
17. Horstman K and de Vries G. Experimenteren met mensen. Kennis & Methode 1989; 13: 62–83.
18. Jansen Y. Pragmatic trials; the mutual shaping of research and primary health care practice. An ethnographic analysis of the role the pragmatic trial methodology fulfils in bridging the science-practice gap. Rotterdam: Erasmus University, 2012.
19. Wehrens R and Bal R. Health programs struggling with complexity. A case study of the Dutch ‘precare’ project. Soc Sci Med 2012; 75: 274–282.
20. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2008; 336: 924–926.
21. Zuiderent-Jerak T, Forland F and Macbeth F. Guidelines should reflect all knowledge, not just clinical trials. BMJ 2012; 345: e6702.
22. Moreira T. Diversity in clinical guidelines: the role of repertoires of evaluation. Soc Sci Med 2005; 60: 1975–1985.
23. Knaapen L. Being ‘evidence-based’ in the absence of evidence: the management of non-evidence in guideline development. Soc Stud Sci 2013; 43: 681–706.
24. van Loon E and Bal R. Uncertainty and the Development of Evidence-Based Guidelines. Val Stud 2014; 2: 43–64.
25. May C and Finch T. Implementing, embedding, and integrating practices: an outline of normalization process theory. Sociology 2009; 43: 535–554.
26. White J. Prices, volume, and the perverse effects of the variations crusade. J Health Politics Pol Law 2011; 36: 775–790.
27. Grol R and Buchan H. Clinical guidelines: what can we do to increase their use? Med J Aus 2006; 185: 301–302.
28. Zuiderent-Jerak T. Competition in the wild. Emerging figurations of healthcare markets. Soc Stud Sci 2009; 39: 765–792.
29. Strating M, Nieboer A, Zuiderent-Jerak T, et al. Creating effective quality improvement collaboratives: a multiple case study. BMJ Qual Safe 2011; 20: 344–350.
30. Wensing M, Bal R and Friele R. Knowledge implementation in healthcare practice: a view from the Netherlands. BMJ Qual Safe 2012; 21: 439–442.
31. Mol A. Living with diabetes: care beyond choice and control. Lancet 2009; 373: 1756–1757.
32. Oertle M and Bal R. Understanding non-adherence in chronic heart failure: a mixed-method case study. Qual Safe Health Care 2010; 19: e37.
33. Contandriopoulos D, Lemire M, Denis J-L, et al. Knowledge exchange processes in organizations and policy arenas: a narrative systematic review of the literature. Milbank Quarter 2010; 88: 444–483.
34. Ubels GM. Narrative accountability and quality awareness: Learning about (re) presenting narrative care. J Aging Stud 2015; 34: 190–198.
35. Wehrens R. Beyond two communities. Rotterdam: Erasmus University, 2013.