Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34865640›Full record

ReviewHealth research policy and systems2021

Assessing the impact of knowledge communication and dissemination strategies targeted at health policy-makers and managers: an overview of systematic reviews.

Evelina Chapman, Tomas Pantoja, Tanja Kuchenmüller, Tarang Sharma, Robert F Terry

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Health research policy and systems, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
9.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Evelina ChapmanOswaldo Cruz Foundation, Brasilia, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5979-6718
Tomas PantojaFamily Medicine Department, School of Medicine, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5473-3053
Tanja Kuchenmüller *Evidence to Policy and Impact, Research for Health - Science Division - World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9021-981X
Tarang SharmaEvidence to Policy, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6916-2604
Robert F Terry *Manager Research Policy, The Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland. terryr@who.int.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3849-7705
World Health Organization · CHFundação Oswaldo Cruz · BRPontificia Universidad Católica de Chile · CL

Funding

The Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases P21-00163World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use of research evidence as an input for health decision-making is a need for most health systems. There are a number of approaches for promoting evidence use at different levels of the health system, but knowledge of their effectiveness is still scarce. The objective of this overview was to evaluate the effectiveness of knowledge communication and dissemination interventions, strategies or approaches targeting policy-makers and health managers.

methodsThis overview of systematic reviews used systematic review methods and was conducted according to a predefined and published protocol. A comprehensive electronic search of 13 databases and a manual search in four websites were conducted. Both published and unpublished reviews in English, Spanish or Portuguese were included. A narrative synthesis was undertaken, and effectiveness statements were developed, informed by the evidence identified.

resultsWe included 27 systematic reviews. Three studies included only a communication strategy, while eight only included dissemination strategies, and the remaining 16 included both. None of the selected reviews provided "sufficient evidence" for any of the strategies, while four provided some evidence for three communication and four dissemination strategies. Regarding communication strategies, the use of tailored and targeted messages seemed to successfully lead to changes in the decision-making practices of the target audience. Regarding dissemination strategies, interventions that aimed at improving only the reach of evidence did not have an impact on its use in decisions, while interventions aimed at enhancing users' ability to use and apply evidence had a positive effect on decision-making processes. Multifaceted dissemination strategies also demonstrated the potential for changing knowledge about evidence but not its implementation in decision-making.

conclusionsThere is limited evidence regarding the effectiveness of interventions targeting health managers and policy-makers, as well as the mechanisms required for achieving impact. More studies are needed that are informed by theoretical frameworks or specific tools and using robust methods, standardized outcome measures and clear descriptions of the interventions. We found that passive communication increased access to evidence but had no effect on uptake. Some evidence indicated that the use of targeted messages, knowledge-brokering and user training was effective in promoting evidence use by managers and policy-makers.

Indexed as

Health PolicyPolicy MakingAdministrative PersonnelCommunicationHumansSystematic Reviews as TopicDecision-making/makersEvidence-informed policy-making/makersKnowledge translationManager

Identifiers

PMID34865640
PMCPMC8645346
OpenAlexW4200607921

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.