Article type
Abstract
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated the rapid availability of evidence to respond in a timely manner to the needs of clinicians and decision-makers in health and social services. Several lessons can be learned from this global health crisis and can be used to put in place actions to improve the capacity of systems to meet evidence needs in a situation of crisis. The main objective of this project was to develop an action plan for the rapid syntheses of research evidence in times of health crisis in Quebec (Canada).
Methods: The project included three phases. First, a survey was carried with producers and users of rapid evidence syntheses (n=40) and a group interview with patient partners (n=3) to prioritizing courses of action. In parallel, a systematic mapping of the literature was performed to identify rapid evidence synthesis initiatives implemented internationally. The results of these two phases were presented in a third phase, in which a deliberative workshop was organized with producers and users of rapid evidence syntheses (n=26) to identifying ways to operationalize priorities. The data collected at the three phases were compared and integrated into an action plan.
Results: A total of 21 courses of action were prioritized, 85 initiatives were found from the literature, and 25 ways to operationalize priorities were identified. From these results, 14 specific actions structured into four main axes were identified: Axis 1 - raising awareness of the importance of evidence-informed decision making among stakeholders in the health and social services network; Axis 2 - promoting optimal collaboration of key stakeholders in the production of rapid evidence synthesis to support decision-making; Axis 3 - advocating the use of a variety of effective rapid evidence synthesis methodologies to support decision-making; Axis 4 - using effective strategies to promote the dissemination, sharing, and use of rapid evidence synthesis products to support decision-making.
Conclusions: This project led to develop a collective action plan aimed at preparing the Quebec ecosystem to meet evidence needs more effectively in times of health emergency. The implementation of this plan and its evaluation will need to be planned.
Methods: The project included three phases. First, a survey was carried with producers and users of rapid evidence syntheses (n=40) and a group interview with patient partners (n=3) to prioritizing courses of action. In parallel, a systematic mapping of the literature was performed to identify rapid evidence synthesis initiatives implemented internationally. The results of these two phases were presented in a third phase, in which a deliberative workshop was organized with producers and users of rapid evidence syntheses (n=26) to identifying ways to operationalize priorities. The data collected at the three phases were compared and integrated into an action plan.
Results: A total of 21 courses of action were prioritized, 85 initiatives were found from the literature, and 25 ways to operationalize priorities were identified. From these results, 14 specific actions structured into four main axes were identified: Axis 1 - raising awareness of the importance of evidence-informed decision making among stakeholders in the health and social services network; Axis 2 - promoting optimal collaboration of key stakeholders in the production of rapid evidence synthesis to support decision-making; Axis 3 - advocating the use of a variety of effective rapid evidence synthesis methodologies to support decision-making; Axis 4 - using effective strategies to promote the dissemination, sharing, and use of rapid evidence synthesis products to support decision-making.
Conclusions: This project led to develop a collective action plan aimed at preparing the Quebec ecosystem to meet evidence needs more effectively in times of health emergency. The implementation of this plan and its evaluation will need to be planned.