• 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 >A journey into unfamiliar terrain
【24h】

A journey into unfamiliar terrain

机译：进入陌生地形的旅程

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

IntroductionnIn my experience, policy-makers are striving tonintroduce complex interventions into dynamic socialnsituations, often under significant political pressures.nThe stakes are frequently high: governments will onlynhave one opportunity in several years or even a decadento make a change in how a programme is structured,nhow a service is delivered and how incentives arenconfigured. Making further changes if you discovernthat the intervention did not have the intended resultsncan be difficult or impossible: once a facility is built, anprogramme is initiated, a medication or clinical interventionnis subsidized, a professional payment arrangementnis introduced, there is considerable resistance tonsubsequent change. So policy-makers are keen to havena prospective answer to the question, ‘what does thenevidence say?’nIn this context, asking researchers to synthesize thenavailable evidence to inform a decision seems one of thenmore straightforward steps in the process. Policymakersnare aware of issues of credibility and possiblenbias with researchers, but they are less attuned to issuesnof methodological approach. The subject of the threenpapers is unlikely to be one that policy-makers confrontndirectly: they are more likely to let academic peernreview or reputation alert them to areas where theynought to be wary. They will undoubtedly, however, usentheir own instincts, intellect and experiences to informntheir confidence level in the various approaches. Basednon my background as a Deputy Minister in two socialnpolicy departments of a Canadian province, here arenmy reactions to the papers and the advice they offer onnmethods of synthesis.
机译：简介n根据我的经验，决策者通常会在巨大的政治压力下努力将复杂的干预措施引入动态的社会环境。n风险往往很高：政府将在几年甚至十年内只有一次机会来改变计划的结构，服务的交付方式以及激励措施的配置方式。如果您发现干预措施没有达到预期的结果，则可能要进行进一步的更改，这将是困难的或不可能的：一旦建立了设施，启动了计划，补贴了药物或临床干预措施，引入了专业的付款安排，就产生了很大的抵抗力，随之而来的变化。因此，决策者们渴望对这个问题有一个前瞻性的答案，“那么证据怎么说？” n在这种情况下，要求研究人员综合当时可用的证据来为决策提供依据，这似乎是该过程中更为直接的步骤之一。决策者不了解研究人员的可信度和可能存在的偏见，但他们对方法论方法的问题不太了解。这三篇论文的主题不太可能是政策制定者直接面对的主题：它们更有可能让学术同行的评论或声誉使他们警觉到应该警惕的领域。但是，他们无疑会利用自己的直觉，理智和经验来告知他们对各种方法的信心水平。基于我在加拿大一个省的两个社会政策部门担任副部长的背景，这里对这些文件及其提供的关于综合方法的建议做出了反应。

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