Dataset Information

Developing evidence briefs for policy: a qualitative case study comparing the process of using a guidance-contextualization workbook in Peru and Uganda.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Translating research evidence from global guidance into policy can help strengthen health systems. A workbook was developed to support the contextualization of the WHO's 'Optimizing health worker roles to improve maternal and newborn health' (OptimizeMNH) guidance. This study evaluated the use of the workbook for the development of evidence briefs in two countries - Peru and Uganda. Findings surrounding contextual factors, steps in the process and evaluation of the workbook are presented.

Methods

A qualitative embedded case study was used. The case was the process of using the workbook to support the contextualization of global health systems guidance, with local evidence, to develop evidence briefs. Criterion sampling was used to select the countries, participants for interviews and documents included in the study. A template-organizing style and constant comparison were used for data analysis.

Results

A total of 19 participant-observation sessions and 8 interviews were conducted, and 50 documents were reviewed. Contextual factors, including the cadres, or groups, of health workers available in each country, the way the problem and its causes were framed, potential policy options to address the problem, and implementation considerations for these policy options, varied substantially between Peru and Uganda. However, many similarities were found in the process of using the workbook. Overall, the workbook was viewed positively and participants in both countries would use it again for other topics.

Conclusions

Organizations that produce global guidance, such as WHO, need to consider institutionalizing the application of the workbook into their guidance development processes to help users at the national/subnational level create actionable and context-relevant policies. Feedback mechanisms also need to be established so that the evidence briefs and health policies arising from global guidance are tracked and the findings coming out of such guideline contextualization processes can be taken into consideration during future guidance development and research priority-setting.

SUBMITTER: Alvarez E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6868683 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Developing evidence briefs for policy: a qualitative case study comparing the process of using a guidance-contextualization workbook in Peru and Uganda.

Alvarez Elizabeth E Lavis John N JN Brouwers Melissa M Carmona Clavijo Gloria G Sewankambo Nelson N Solari Lely L Schwartz Lisa L

Health research policy and systems 20191121 1

<h4>Background</h4>Translating research evidence from global guidance into policy can help strengthen health systems. A workbook was developed to support the contextualization of the WHO's 'Optimizing health worker roles to improve maternal and newborn health' (OptimizeMNH) guidance. This study evaluated the use of the workbook for the development of evidence briefs in two countries - Peru and Uganda. Findings surrounding contextual factors, steps in the process and evaluation of the workbook ar ...[more]

PMID: 31752888

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundGlobal guidance can help countries strengthen their health systems to deliver effective interventions to their populations. However, to have an impact, guidance needs to be contextualised or adapted to local settings; this process includes consideration of health system arrangements and political system factors. To date, methods to support contextualisation do not exist. In response, a workbook was designed to provide specific methods and strategies to enable the contextualisation of WHO's 'Optimizing health worker roles to improve maternal and newborn health' (OptimizeMNH) guidance at the national or subnational level. The objective of this study was to describe the process of developing the workbook and identify key steps of the development process, barriers that arose and facilitators that helped overcome some of these barriers.MethodsA qualitative single case study design was carried out. Interviews, documents and a reflexive journal were used. Constant comparison and an edit-style of organisation were used during data analysis to develop concepts, themes, subthemes and relationships among them.ResultsThirteen interviews were conducted and 52 documents were reviewed. Three main steps were identified in the process of developing the workbook for health systems guidance contextualisation, namely (1) determining the need for and gaining approval to develop the workbook, (2) developing the workbook (taking on the task, creating the structure of the workbook, operationalising its components, undergoing approval processes and editing it), and (3) implementing the workbook both at the WHO level and at the national/subnational level. Five barriers and/or facilitators emerged relevant to each step, namely (1) having well-placed and credible champions, (2) creating and capitalising on opportunities, (3) finding the right language to engage various actors and obtain buy-in, (4) obtaining and maintaining meaningful buy-in, and (5) ensuring access to resources.ConclusionsUnderstanding the key steps and the critical factors involved in the process of developing the workbook could help in the planning of similar and other tools aimed to support the implementation of WHO guidance. A plan for dissemination and implementation needs to be addressed during the preparation of these tools.

Project description:Medical education and clinical practice support the development of clinical reasoning competency. Traditionally, the process of clinical reasoning is taught through small group discussions in pre-clinical and clinical medical training, and the need exists to explore further teaching and learning approaches that develop clinical reasoning. This study compared teaching and learning the clinical reasoning process through the virtual platform of Second Life (SL) with the traditional classroom setting. Participants were first semester veterinary students; 34 participated virtually through SL, and 41 experienced traditional classroom interactions. Students and one facilitator engaged in three small group meetings to process a clinical case. A seven-item clinical reasoning rubric guided the teaching, learning, and assessment. Clinical reasoning assignments were scored on a grading scale from 0 to 4 with a maximum result of 28. Descriptive statistics for clinical reasoning assignment scores were (m = 14.0; SD = 2.6) and (m = 12.2; SD = 2.6) in SL and classroom interaction, respectively. Results indicated positive associations for all participants between the rubric item score of gathering historical information with (1) gathering physical examination information (p < 0.01) and (2) prioritizing patient's problems (p = 0.003). Additionally, the rubric item score of gathering physical examination information was positively associated with the rubric item score for prioritizing patient's problems (p = 0.02). Specifically for the SL cohort, results demonstrated that rubric item scores were significantly higher for gathering historical information (p = 0.03), gathering physical examination information (p < 0.01), and prioritizing patient's problems (p = 0.02). Small group interaction using SL and traditional classroom environments offers a comparable educational platform for developing clinical reasoning process skills.

Dataset Information

Developing evidence briefs for policy: a qualitative case study comparing the process of using a guidance-contextualization workbook in Peru and Uganda.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Developing evidence briefs for policy: a qualitative case study comparing the process of using a guidance-contextualization workbook in Peru and Uganda.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets