4.4 Editorial Material

Evidence-based health policy in Germany: lack of communication and coordination between academia and health authorities?

期刊

SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS
卷 12, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-023-02204-6

关键词

Replication; Communication; Collaborative research; Knowledge translation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Health-care decision making should be based on the best available evidence, but the identification and use of systematic reviews (SRs) can be difficult due to their number and overlap. Duplicate reviews and primary data analysis are common, highlighting a lack of communication and coordination between health authorities and academia. Integrated knowledge translation (IKT) may be a solution, promoting collaboration between researchers and decision-makers throughout the research process.
Health-care decision making should consider the best available evidence, often in the form of systematic reviews (SRs). The number of existing SRs and their overlap make their identification and use difficult. Decision makers often rely on de novo SRs instead of using existing SRs. We describe two cases of duplicate reviews (minimum volume threshold of total knee arthroplasties and lung cancer screening) and one case of duplicate primary data analysis (transcatheter aortic valve implantation). All cases have in common that unintended duplication of research occurred between health authorities and academia, demonstrating a lack of communication and coordination between them.It is important to note that academia and health authorities have different incentives. Academics are often measured by the number of peer-reviewed publications and grants awarded. In contrast, health authorities must comply with laws and are commissioned to deliver a specific report within a defined period of time. Most replication is currently unintended. A solution may be the collaboration of stakeholders commonly referred to as integrated knowledge translation (IKT). The IKT approach means that research is conducted in collaboration with the end users of the research. It requires active collaborations between researchers and decision-makers or knowledge users (clinicians, managers, policy makers) throughout the research process. Wherever cooperation is possible in spite of requirements for independence or confidentiality, legal regulations should facilitate and support collaborative approaches between academia and health authorities.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据