Increasing the Use of Evidence in Health Policy: Practice and Views of Policy Makers and Researchers

According to the Abstract of this research: "Better communication is often suggested as fundamental to increasing the use of research evidence in policy, but little is known about how researchers and policy makers work together or about barriers to exchange. This study explored the views and practice of policy makers and researchers regarding the use of evidence in policy, including:

1. current use of research to inform policy;
   
2. dissemination of and access to research findings for policy;
   
3. communication and exchange between researchers and policy makers; and
   
4. incentives for increasing the use of research in policy."
   

This Australia-based study used interviews of policy makers and researchers from New South Wales (NSW) Health and from public health and health service research groups. It intended to seek information to follow an earlier study showing that: "...reports from completed projects funded through National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) grants found that only 14% of principal investigators felt their research had influenced public health practice, and only nine percent believed their work had made any impact on health policy."

In the results of the interviewing - 38 policy makers and 41 researchers completed interviews - policy makers reported rarely using research to inform policy agendas or to evaluate the impact of policy; research was used more commonly to inform policy content. The majority of policy makers used research only infrequently to inform policy agendas. Most participants also used research infrequently to evaluate the implementation or impact of policies. All respondents had used research to inform policy content at some time in the previous year. Nevertheless, only a minority of participants (29%) used research to inform content on more than three-quarters of policies. Most policy makers had wanted to contact a researcher during the past 12 months to sound out an issue. Of those who had wanted to discuss ideas with a researcher in the previous year, approximately half were easily able to contact a relevant researcher when needed. Most respondents had attended forums to hear research findings and about half of the respondents had actively invited researchers to participate in the policy process by providing a research perspective or joining a policy development committee. More than two-thirds of the policy makers had acted in an advisory role in research, participated in the development of research questions, or assisted with the dissemination of research results. Half of the interviewees reported active participation in a research team. However, fewer had been involved in the sorts of activities that are likely to facilitate communication and application of research, such as participating in the analysis, writing up, and publication of the research results. Eighteen percent of the sample had collaborated on a successful competitive research grant.

Most researchers reported that their research had informed local policy, mainly by increasing awareness of an issue. More than half reported that they often identified the policy or practice implications of their research findings, but only a third regularly developed explicit policy recommendations or summaries from their research for policy makers. A third had frequently developed targeted strategies for communicating their research to non-academic audiences, and 44% often wrote reports or papers about their research for non-academics.

Researchers reported that almost all had presented their research findings at a conference or forum where state- or area-level policy makers were likely to have been present, but only half had presented their research findings to a forum specifically for policy makers. Two-thirds had been approached informally to provide a research perspective on a policy issue, half had been funded by a local policy agency to conduct research, and a third had been funded to undertake a research review. Eighty percent of interviewees had wanted to involve a policy maker in their research at some time in the previous two years. Of these, more than half were easily able to find a policy maker to contribute when needed, but 27% found it difficult to contact a policy maker, and 15% could not find an appropriate person. Policy makers were most often approached by researchers to sound out ideas for research questions or act in an advisory capacity to a research team, such as through a steering committee. Respondents felt that these were the most useful roles for policy makers in terms of influencing the direction, implementation, interpretation, or dissemination of their research.

Policy makers reported difficulty in accessing useful research syntheses. Both policy makers and researchers wanted more exchange and saw this as important for increasing the use of research evidence in policy; however, both groups reported a high level of involvement by policy makers in research.

Strategies for and impediments to increasing the use of research in policy include:

• Making research findings more accessible to policy makers using ideas from policy makers: "building bridging systems between researchers and policy makers" and "standing arrangement with key research groups and key research people who can readily assist in policy making".
  
• From a research perspective, fostering the following: existing relationships and networks with policy makers; the quality and credibility of the research; a receptive policy environment - the 'right research at the right time'; research that is designed specifically to address policy priorities; a better understanding of the importance of research among policy makers and politicians; more opportunities for dialogue and interaction with policy makers; and more research and funding.
  
• Removing or reducing impediments to research influencing policy, from a researcher perspective, including: research findings that were politically sensitive or inconsistent with policy directions; the importance of other policy drivers, such as politics or media; practical constraints to the implementation of findings, such as financial implications; and a lack of incentive from policy making, research funding, or academic sectors to increase research uptake.