Article type
Year
Abstract
Background: Successful dialogue between researchers and policymakers may facilitate evidence-informed decision-making by helping policymakers understand what research can or cannot do, and researchers understand how policy making works.
Objectives: To develop and apply a formal one-to-one partnership (‘buddying’) between provincial policymakers and evidence-based health researchers (‘buddies’); and to evaluate the buddies’ experiences.
Methods: Policymakers identified questions relevant to them during interviews in the baseline situational analysis. Each buddy initiated and drove the interaction process with a policymaker for their question, drawing support from the buddies group that included all researchers involved in the project. A dedicated online website and monthly contact sessions were used by buddies to share resources and continuously document interactions, reflections and experiences.
Results: We applied buddying to five questions: 1) adherence support for chronic diseases; 2) prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV; 3) task shifting for antiretroviral treatment; 4) health promotion for diet and physical activity' and 5) integration of care for chronic diseases. Having policymakers who champion the use of evidence appears to facilitate ‘buddying’. Engagement helped researchers understand that systematic review evidence is only a piece of the complex policymaking puzzle. Buddying can be time-consuming and is affected by frequent staff turnover of policymakers. Scenarios for evidence requests were different: for some questions, evidence was sought to endorse existing policies and for others, to inform new policy development.
Conclusions: Successful, sustainable engagement between researchers and policymakers to advance evidence-informed decision-making is not a quick, simple process. Buddying, centred on partnerships and relationships, may provide a knowledge translation platform that could strengthen health interventions and services by enhancing evidence into policy; however, many uncertainties still remain.
Objectives: To develop and apply a formal one-to-one partnership (‘buddying’) between provincial policymakers and evidence-based health researchers (‘buddies’); and to evaluate the buddies’ experiences.
Methods: Policymakers identified questions relevant to them during interviews in the baseline situational analysis. Each buddy initiated and drove the interaction process with a policymaker for their question, drawing support from the buddies group that included all researchers involved in the project. A dedicated online website and monthly contact sessions were used by buddies to share resources and continuously document interactions, reflections and experiences.
Results: We applied buddying to five questions: 1) adherence support for chronic diseases; 2) prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV; 3) task shifting for antiretroviral treatment; 4) health promotion for diet and physical activity' and 5) integration of care for chronic diseases. Having policymakers who champion the use of evidence appears to facilitate ‘buddying’. Engagement helped researchers understand that systematic review evidence is only a piece of the complex policymaking puzzle. Buddying can be time-consuming and is affected by frequent staff turnover of policymakers. Scenarios for evidence requests were different: for some questions, evidence was sought to endorse existing policies and for others, to inform new policy development.
Conclusions: Successful, sustainable engagement between researchers and policymakers to advance evidence-informed decision-making is not a quick, simple process. Buddying, centred on partnerships and relationships, may provide a knowledge translation platform that could strengthen health interventions and services by enhancing evidence into policy; however, many uncertainties still remain.