How to be better prepared to address evidence needs during health crisis: a proposed action plan for rapid evidence synthesis

Oral
2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
Hong Q1, Mc Sween-Cadieux E2, Lane J2, Guillette M2, Manceau L2, Li J3, Granikov V4, Pomey M5, Gagnon M6, Ziam S7, Dagenais C8, Dagenais P2, Lesage A8, Poder T8, Drapeau M9, Ridde V10
1Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation of Greater Montreal (CRIR) , Montreal, Quebec, Canada
2Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada
3Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation of Greater Montreal (CRIR) , Montreal, Quebec, Canada
4Centre de recherche du Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CRCHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada
5Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Centre de recherche du Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CRCHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada
6Université Laval, Quebec, Quebec, Canada
7TELUQ, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
8Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
9McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
10CEPED, IRD-Université de Paris, Paris, Île-de-France, France

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.