• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Health Services Research & Policy >Making evidence synthesis more useful for management and policy-making
【24h】

Making evidence synthesis more useful for management and policy-making

机译：使证据综合对于管理和决策更加有用

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

IntroductionnEvidence-based medicine (EBM), though still relativelynnew, is successful in challenging unjustified variationsnin clinical practice and helps to protect the public bynshifting the centre of gravity of clinical decision-makingnto ensure a more explicit consideration of high-qualityn(usually evaluative) research evidence.1 EBM hasnspawned an international industry producing andnsynthesizing evidence and developing guidelines alongnwith mechanisms to promote implementation.nThis has prompted calls for an analogous transformationnin policy-making and health care management.n2 There is growing international interest innencouraging public policy and management to benbetter informed by the results of relevant and reliablenresearch3 (see the statement from the MinisterialnSummit on Health Research in November 2004).4nThis is fuelled by research showing that some healthnand social interventions which have been commonlynapplied in the belief that they were doing good arenactually harmful, that others are largely ineffective andnthus wasteful of public resources and, furthermore,nthat some effective interventions have been only slowlynadopted or largely ignored.nHowever, there has been disappointment at the lacknof progress in promoting evidence-based policy andnmanagement compared with the relative success ofnevidence-based medicine. Methods of evidence synthesisn– the process of bringing together the results ofnindividual research studies in order to better map thenknowledge base –have developed over the last couple ofndecades. However, the consumers of policy andnmanagement research have not found the outputsnsufficiently relevant and useful, and researchers havenbecome frustrated by the lack of uptake of the results ofnsuch systematic reviews by policy-makers and managers.nIn an effort to advance thinking and encouragendebate by those who commission or those whonsynthesize evidence, the Canadian Health ServicesnResearch Foundation (CHSRF) and the NHS ServicenDelivery and Organisation R&D Programme commissionednthree papers and four commentaries on themnby policy-makers, advisors and health services managers,nalong with a workshop for them to refine theirnthinking. The papers and the commentaries appear innthis supplement.
机译：引言循证医学（EBM）虽然仍然相对较新，但它在挑战临床实践中的不合理变异方面取得了成功，并通过转移临床决策的重心来确保公众对高质量（通常是评估性）研究的更明确考虑，从而帮助保护了公众。证据。1EBM催生了一个国际行业，该行业生产和综合证据并制定指导方针以及促进实施的机制。n这促使人们呼吁在政策制定和医疗保健管理方面进行类似的转换。n2越来越多的国际关注要求公共政策和管理变得更好。通过相关且可靠的研究3的结果（请参见部长会议关于健康研究的声明，2004年11月）。4n研究表明某些通常被认为对他们有益的健康和社会干预实际上是有效的。怀抱，认为其他人基本上是无效的，因此浪费了公共资源，此外，一些有效的干预措施只是缓慢地被采纳或基本上被忽略了。n然而，与相对成功相比，在促进基于证据的政策和管理方面缺乏进展令人失望循证医学。证据的合成方法（将各个研究结果汇总在一起以更好地了解知识基础的过程）在过去的20多年中得到了发展。但是，政策和管理研究的消费者尚未发现产出的相关性和有用性，研究人员也未因决策者和管理者对此类系统评价结果的缺乏而感到沮丧。n努力推动那些思考和鼓励的人委员会或那些收集证据的人，加拿大卫生服务研究基金会（NHS）和NHS服务交付与组织研发计划就政策制定者，顾问和卫生服务经理撰写了三篇论文和四篇评论，此外还为他们提供了一个研讨会，以完善他们的思维方式。论文和评论出现在本增刊中。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号