• 1. Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, and Department of Political Science, McMaster University;2. Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services;3. Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, Health Systems Research Unit, Medical Research Council of South Africa;4. Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo;
Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

決策者開展或支持知證決策與項目的資源有限。所需資源包括員工的工作時間、員工開展工作的基礎設施(如電子圖書館的使用權限或購買期刊文章)和不斷更新專業知識。決策者們也許更愿意將這樣的工作承包給具備恰當技能和設施的獨立機構,但決策者的資金有限。不管為知證決策提供的支持來自外部還是內部,是集中還是分散,資源都需要合理最大化利用。不恰當設定優先次序的例子包括:① 采取逐個評價個案的方式支持知證決策制定時間進度表, 而不是為每一個時間進度表提供明確規范的支持力度;② 優先次序設定的標準含糊不清;尤其設定優先次序的過程不清楚或不系統不準確;③ 無交流和監測評價計劃。本文提出用于指導在查找和使用研究證據支持知證決策的過程中如何設定優先次序的問題,包括:① 設定優先次序的方法可否明確地為以不同方式解決最優先問題制定時間表?② 該方法是否采用了設定優先次序的清晰標準?③ 該方法是否采用了設定優先次序的清晰流程?④ 該方法是否采用了交流策略和監測與評估計劃?

Citation: John N Lavis,Andrew D Oxman,Simon Lewin,Atle Fretheim. SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 3: Setting priorities for supporting evidence-informed policymaking*. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2010, 10(3): 255-261. doi: 10.7507/1672-2531.20100395 Copy

Copyright ? the editorial department of Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine of West China Medical Publisher. All rights reserved

  • Previous Article

    SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 2: Improving how your organisation supports the use of research evidence to inform policymaking*
  • Next Article

    SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 4:? Using research rvidence to clarify a problem*