Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Sep 4:11:32.
doi: 10.1186/1478-4505-11-32.

The global stock of research evidence relevant to health systems policymaking

Michael G Wilson  1 , Kaelan A Moat, John N Lavis
Affiliations

The global stock of research evidence relevant to health systems policymaking

Michael G Wilson et al. Health Res Policy Syst. .

Abstract

Background: Policymakers and stakeholders need immediate access to many types of research evidence to make informed decisions about the full range of questions that may arise regarding health systems.

Methods: We examined all types of research evidence about governance, financial and delivery arrangements, and implementation strategies within health systems contained in Health Systems Evidence (HSE) (http://www.healthsystemsevidence.org). The research evidence types include evidence briefs for policy, overviews of systematic reviews, systematic reviews of effects, systematic reviews addressing other questions, systematic reviews in progress, systematic reviews being planned, economic evaluations, and health reform and health system descriptions. Specifically, we describe their distribution across health system topics and domains, trends in their production over time, availability of supplemental content in various languages, and the extent to which they focus on low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), as well as (for systematic reviews) their methodological quality and the availability of user-friendly summaries.

Results: As of July 2013, HSE contained 2,629 systematic reviews of effects (of which 501 are Cochrane reviews), 614 systematic reviews addressing other questions, 283 systematic reviews in progress, 186 systematic reviews being planned, 140 review-derived products (evidence briefs and overviews of systematic reviews), 1,669 economic evaluations, 1,092 health reform descriptions, and 209 health system descriptions. Most systematic reviews address topics related to delivery arrangements (n = 2,663) or implementation strategies (n = 1,653) with far fewer addressing financial (n = 241) or governance arrangements (n = 231). In addition, 2,928 systematic reviews have been quality appraised with moderate AMSTAR ratings found for reviews addressing governance (5.6/11), financial (5.9/11), and delivery (6.3/11) arrangements and implementation strategies (6.5/11); 1,075 systematic reviews have no independently produced user-friendly summary and only 737 systematic reviews have an LMIC focus. Literature searches for half of the systematic reviews (n = 1,584, 49%) were conducted within the last five years.

Conclusions: Greater effort needs to focus on assessing whether the current distribution of systematic reviews corresponds to policymakers' and stakeholders' priorities, updating systematic reviews, increasing the quality of systematic reviews, and focusing on LMICs.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Last year literature was searched for systematic reviews and overviews of systematic reviews.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Publication dates for documents.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Mean quality (AMSTAR) score.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Last year literature was searched for systematic reviews and overviews of systematic reviews with an LMIC focus.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Lavis JN, Davies HTO, Oxman AD, Denis J-L, Golden-Biddle K, Ferlie E. Towards systematic reviews that inform health care management and policy-making. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2005;10(Suppl. 1):35–48. - PubMed
    1. Lavis JN, Posada FB, Haines A, Osei E. Use of research to inform public policymaking. Lancet. 2004;364:1615–1621. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)17317-0. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lavis JN, Davies HTO, Gruen RL. Working within and beyond the Cochrane Collaboration to make systematic reviews more useful to healthcare managers and policy makers. Healthcare Policy. 2006;1:21–33. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Egger M, Smith GD, O'Rourke K. Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Meta-Analysis in Context. ondon: BMJ Books: 2nd edition. Egger M, Smith GD, Altman DG (Eds.); 2001. Rationale, potentials, and promise of systematic reviews; pp. 3–19.
    1. Lavis JN. How can we support the use of systematic reviews in policymaking? PLoS Medicine. 2009;6(11):e1000141. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000141. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources