Transcript decision makers - Canadian Research Data Centre Network

Building Bridges Between Research
and Health Policy Decision-Making
Jasmine Lefebvre
Senior Knowledge Translation Specialist
Canadian Research Data Centre Network
National Conference, October 22-24, 2012
Today I will talk about…
 Overview of CIHR
 Challenges in bridging research and policy
 Initiatives aimed at bridging research and policy
 Evidence on Tap
 Evidence-Informed Healthcare Renewal
 Outcomes and Lessons Learned
Overview of CIHR
•
CIHR is the Government of Canada’s funding agency
for health research and knowledge translation
•
CIHR supports more than 14,000 researchers and
trainees
•
CIHR funds a broad spectrum of health research,
encompassing four themes:




Biomedical
Clinical
Health systems and services
Population and public health
CIHR Approach - 13 virtual
institutes
Each led by a Scientific
Director who:
builds Institute and research
capacity
establishes and nurtures
partnerships
fosters networking,
knowledge dissemination and
communication
works as part of CIHR
management team
conducts research
Supported by Institute
Advisory Boards:
linkage to stakeholder
communities
Knowledge Translation is part of our mandate
Health Research Roadmap
• Support a high-quality,
accessible and
sustainable healthcare
system (Strategic
Direction #2)
• Support evidenceinformed policy-making
to improve health and
the health system at
provincial and federal
levels (Strategic
Direction #3)
Why bridge research and
policymaking?
• Policy which is informed by systematic evidence generally
leads to better outcomes
• Widely agreed that health policies do not reflect research
evidence to the extent that in theory they could
• There are many genuine obstacles to evidence-informed
policy-making, which require a concerted effort to build
capacity
• Research indicates that exchange between the very
different worlds of research and policymaking leads to
more relevant research and policy decisions
Challenges in supporting research
use in policymaking
1. Research isn’t valued as an information input
(general climate for research use)
2. Research isn’t relevant (production)
3. Research isn’t easy to use (translation)
a. Research isn’t communicated effectively (push)
b. Research isn’t available when policymakers need it and
in a form that they can use (facilitating pull)
c.
Policymakers lack mechanisms to prompt them to use
research in policymaking (pull)
d. Policymakers lack fora where systems challenges can be
worked through with key stakeholders (exchange)
Taken from Dr. John’s Lavis’ presentation to the HealthCare 2010 Symposium
Barriers and facilitators to
researcher/policymaker collaboration
Facilitators
Barriers
absence of personal contact
personal contact
lack of timeliness or relevance of research
timeliness and relevance of research cultural differences, mutual mistrust
summaries + policy recommendations concerns about quality of research
time commitments and constraints
staff turnover
“Personal two-way communication between researchers and
decision-makers should be used to facilitate the use of research.
This can reduce mutual mistrust and promote a better understanding
of policy-making by researchers and research by policy-makers.”
Innvaer et al. (2002) J Health Serv Res Policy, 7(4):239-44.
Knowledge translation activities to link the
research and policymaking processes
Research
Process
Knowledge
Translation
Processes
PolicyMaking
Process
Purposefully linked processes
Taken from Dr. John’s Lavis’ presentation to the HealthCare 2010 Symposium
Integrated Knowledge Translation
• Integrated KT:
 Is a way of doing research (i.e., an approach, not a method)
 Is collaborative, participatory, action-oriented research
Involves engaging and integrating knowledge users into the
research process
• Knowledge users can be:
 Policymakers, decision makers, researchers, the public,
industry, clinicians, the media
 Investigators from different disciplines, teams, countries
Because they participate throughout the research process,
the research results are more likely to be relevant to and
used by decision makers
CIHR Initiatives contributing to
bridging research and policy
1. Evidence on Tap (EoT)
Objective: To produce high-quality, timely, and accessible
evidence that is of immediate interest and use to
senior government policy makers.
2. Evidence-Informed Healthcare Renewal (EIHR)
Objective: To provide timely and high-quality evidence - both in
the short term and beyond for the perennial topics of
how best to finance, sustain and govern provincial,
territorial and federal healthcare systems
CIHR initiatives contributing to
bridging research and policy
EoT
Best Brains Exchanges
Expedited Knowledge
Synthesis
EIHR*
Healthcare Renewal Policy
Analysis
Science Policy Fellowships
PHSI
*Other funding tools are also used within the EIHR initiative
EoT: Best Brains Exchanges
What is a Best Brains Exchange?
• A one-day meeting that brings together the “best brains” of research and
decision-making on a ministry-identified, high-priority issue for a closed-door
“brain dump”.
• In-camera discussions
(Chatham House Rule)
• Researchers summarize the
relevant evidence and
suggest what it implies about
possible policy directions
• Researchers and decision
makers discuss the
implications of the research
EoT: Expedited Knowledge Synthesis
What is an Expedited Knowledge Synthesis?
•
Syntheses are often cited as the preferred source of evidence
to inform decision-making but usually take too long to produce
•
EKS accelerates all phases of synthesis production –
application, review, research, knowledge translation.
•
Decision-makers submit priority synthesis topics to CIHR
•
Pre-qualified teams apply, and following merit review, selected
teams synthesize the evidence in an accelerated timeframe
and participate in a workshop illustrating their findings.
•
Outcomes: high-quality knowledge syntheses and workshops
that respond to decision-making priorities.
Recent topics: EIHR, Suicide Prevention, MS (CCSVI)
EIHR: Healthcare Renewal
Policy Analysis
Purpose:
• to support the generation of health policy analyses that
identify evidence-informed policy options for healthcare
renewal (including public health) in Canada and that will be
useful to health system policy and decision makers.
• to offer policy and decision makers evidence-informed policy
options for healthcare renewal issues of high importance over
the next two-to-three years.
Areas of Focus:
• EIHR: Financing and funding models, governance and
sustainability of the healthcare system
Research responding to the needs
of policy and decision makers
•
Expedited
Knowledge
Synthesis
•
Healthcare
Renewal Policy
Analysis
EIHR: Science Policy Fellowships
Purpose:
• To establish and nurture critical links between policy makers
and external researchers in support of evidence-informed
public policy by providing short-term policy assignments
• Provide trainees and investigators with exposure to how
government works and how public policies are made
• Engage health research trainees and investigators in the
policy-making process
• Encourage trainees and investigators to conduct policyrelevant research that addresses challenges facing society
• Assist policy-makers in gathering the external scientific
expertise required to inform their decisions
Currently accepting applications (deadline Dec. 5, 2012)
Partnerships for Health System
Improvement (PHSI)
• PHSI offers Canada’s health-system decision makers evidenceinformed answers to their most pressing questions.
• A funding program founded on partnerships, every PHSI project
involves collaboration between decision makers and
researchers interested in working together to address health
system challenges.
• Any applied health services and policy research topic can be
addressed so long as it responds to the information needs of
the participating decision makers.
Outcomes and Lessons Learned
Feedback from Policy Makers (Ministry leads)
Cultivated an appreciation for and tendency to consider health services research
(“There’s a tone and culture shift I’m feeling about valuing and appreciating health
services research in our policy”)
• Fostered relationships with researchers (“we’re more inclined to reach out”)
• Strengthened relationships between the Ministries and CIHR (“we have a much
deeper relationship with CIHR now” and “Now you hear our Deputy talk about CIHR
all the time. He talks about the Best Brains and says that what we’re trying to do is
accomplish fundamental change and that CIHR, with the Best Brains, is helping us
achieve this.”)
•Contributed directly to policy- and decision-making (“We went from Best Brains into
action really fast,” and “it has contributed to evidence-informed decision-making –
especially in terms of directions not taken.”)
•Mechanism for follow-up with individual decision makers is needed
Outcomes and Lessons Learned
Feedback from Researchers:
• Most common goals are “to be useful” and “to contribute to
policymaking”
• Researchers valued the exchange of ideas with decision makers,
opportunity for insight into their priority questions, chance to contribute
directly to policy-making, and the opportunity to network
Comments
“Put me down as a wild enthusiast!”; “it’s an absolutely fabulous initiative.”
“Absolutely [CIHR should continue the program]. I’d advocate for this
because it’s a very effective use of KT dollars.”
Outcomes and Lessons Learned
Feedback from Science Policy Fellows:
"I think my experience as a science policy fellow has prepared me to interact more
effectively with policy makers and health professionals. I can see things from their
perspective, which will be invaluable if I want to succeed as an applied researcher
and impact population health through decision-making and knowledge
translation." Dr. Rasha Maal-Bared, CIHR/Health Canada Science Policy Fellow
“The CIHR Science Policy Fellowship was a unique opportunity to really step out
of my academic setting and get a sense of what matters most in policy
development. Working alongside the policy experts at Health Canada allowed me
to translate my research into a meaningful health policy discussion. Because of
the links existing between Health Canada and the Canadian healthcare industry,
the Fellowship also gave me a better understanding of how to bridge the gap
between research and innovation.” Jason Millar , CIHR/Health Canada Science
Policy Fellow
For More Information
Website: About Knowledge Translation
http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/29418.html
E-mail: [email protected]
[email protected]
Thank you