Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41214346›Full record

ReviewNature medicine2025

Maximizing researcher-policymaker engagement in global public health.

J Jaime Miranda, David Beran, Rachel Nugent, Francisco Diez-Canseco, Jennifer L Sargent, Nyovani Madise, Branwen J Hennig, M Michelle Jimenez, Helena Legido-Quigley, Walter Mendoza and 3 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
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

13 authors.

J Jaime MirandaCRONICAS Centre of Excellence in Chronic Diseases, Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia, Lima, Peru. Jaime.Miranda@upch.pe.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4738-5468
David BeranDivision of Tropical and Humanitarian Medicine, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
Rachel NugentCenter for Global Noncommunicable Diseases, RTI International, Research Triangle Park, Durham, NC, USA.
Francisco Diez-CansecoCRONICAS Centre of Excellence in Chronic Diseases, Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia, Lima, Peru.
Jennifer L SargentSchool of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0008-3697-1737
Nyovani MadiseAfrican Institute for Development Policy, Lilongwe, Malawi.
Branwen J HennigGlobal Health Policy Lab, Virchow Foundation, Berlin, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4127-8386
M Michelle JimenezGavi, the Vaccine Alliance, Geneva, Switzerland.
Helena Legido-QuigleySchool of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Walter MendozaUnited Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), Lima, Peru.
David PeirisGeorge Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Camila CorvalanCenter for Research in Food Environments and Prevention of Nutrition-Related Diseases (CIAPEC), Institute of Nutrition and Food Technology (INTA), University of Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Kent BuseGlobal Health 50/50, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A common misconception that prevails within some research communities postulates that research results 'speak for themselves' and are thus sufficient to influence policy. Yet, high-fidelity uptake of research is rarely a passive process; more often, researchers need to actively engage with policymakers. This process of policy engagement strives towards producing robust science that contributes to the betterment of our societies-but it is a process for which many researchers are not adequately trained. If publicly funded research fails to influence policy, many would regard it as falling short of fulfilling its potential value to society. Herein, we provide a framework for research-policymaker engagement, framed around the questions of why, on what, with whom, when, where and how clinical and public-health researchers can and should undertake engagement with policymakers. The views presented in this Perspective are a synthesis of the diverse, collective experience of the authors across global health contexts, supported by real-world illustrative case studies. We provide tangible recommendations for researchers, funders and policymakers to facilitate bridging the gap between evidence and policy.

Indexed as

Administrative PersonnelGlobal HealthPublic HealthResearch PersonnelHealth PolicyHumansPolicy Making

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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.