prikaz prve stranice dokumenta User testing and evaluation of Evidence for Equity : systematic review summaries for policy makers
  Download
PDF 849.46 KB
doctoral thesis
User testing and evaluation of Evidence for Equity : systematic review summaries for policy makers
Split: University of Split, School of Medicine, 2017. urn:nbn:hr:171:824300
Petkovic, Jennifer
University of Split
School of Medicine

Institutional repository: MEFST Repository

Cite this document

Petkovic, J. (2017). User testing and evaluation of Evidence for Equity : systematic review summaries for policy makers (Doctoral thesis). Split: University of Split, School of Medicine. Retrieved from https://urn.nsk.hr/urn:nbn:hr:171:824300

Petkovic, Jennifer. "User testing and evaluation of Evidence for Equity : systematic review summaries for policy makers." Doctoral thesis, University of Split, School of Medicine, 2017. https://urn.nsk.hr/urn:nbn:hr:171:824300

Petkovic, Jennifer. "User testing and evaluation of Evidence for Equity : systematic review summaries for policy makers." Doctoral thesis, University of Split, School of Medicine, 2017. https://urn.nsk.hr/urn:nbn:hr:171:824300

Petkovic, J. (2017). 'User testing and evaluation of Evidence for Equity : systematic review summaries for policy makers', Doctoral thesis, University of Split, School of Medicine, accessed 26 November 2024, https://urn.nsk.hr/urn:nbn:hr:171:824300

Petkovic J. User testing and evaluation of Evidence for Equity : systematic review summaries for policy makers [Doctoral thesis]. Split: University of Split, School of Medicine; 2017 [cited 2024 November 26] Available at: https://urn.nsk.hr/urn:nbn:hr:171:824300

J. Petkovic, "User testing and evaluation of Evidence for Equity : systematic review summaries for policy makers", Doctoral thesis, University of Split, School of Medicine, Split, 2017. Available at: https://urn.nsk.hr/urn:nbn:hr:171:824300

Metadata
TitleUser testing and evaluation of Evidence for Equity : systematic review summaries for policy makers
Title (croatian)Korisničko testiranje i evaluacija E4E (Evidence for Equity) : sustavni pregledni sažeci za kreatore politike
AuthorJennifer Petkovic https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5824-584X
MentorPeter Tugwell https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5062-0556 (mentor)
Committee memberOzren Polašek (predsjednik povjerenstva)
Committee memberDavor Štimac (član povjerenstva)
Committee memberLivia Puljak (član povjerenstva)
GranterUniversity of Split
School of Medicine
Split
Defense date and country2017, Croatia
Scientific / art field,
discipline and subdiscipline		BIOMEDICINE AND HEALTHCARE
Clinical Medical Sciences
Universal decimal classification
(UDC)		616 - Pathology. Clinical medicine
Abstract
While policy makers are increasingly using systematic reviews for decision making, policy and program decisions are often made without the use of research evidence or without appropriately and transparently appraising the quality of the evidence. However, systematic reviews often contain technical language, lack important contextual information and are usually long documents that may not be easily accessible by those in decision making roles. For these reasons, the development of summaries of systematic reviews has become more common. Health inequities are avoidable differences in health outcomes. Systematic reviews can help reduce health inequities by providing evidence on interventions that can address inequities. Equity considerations in systematic reviews are useful for policy making and policy makers have indicated that systematic reviews are useful sources of evidence for decision making. However, this requires systematic review authors consider the effects of the intervention on population subgroups that may be at risk for disadvantage. We have: 1) described the acronym PROGRESS-Plus to assist systematic review authors in identifying potentially disadvantaged populations, 2) conducted a systematic review to assess the effectiveness of evidence summaries on health policy makers and health system managers use of evidence from systematic reviews, and 3) conducted user tests with a small sample of stakeholders on a collection of pilot summaries of systematic reviews. The systematic review of evidence summaries found that the graded entry approach increased usability. We used this format to develop E4E. Our pilot summaries were considered useful by our stakeholders however, while the format was positively received improvements to the overall look and presentation of the summaries is needed to increase their value.
Abstract (croatian)
Donosioci odluka sve češće koriste sustavne preglede za donošenje odluka, definiranje politika i odlučivanje o programima. Te odluke znaju se koristiti i bez korištenja dokaza iz istraživanja ili bez propisnog i transparentnog procjenjivanja kvalitete dokaza. Međutim, sustavni pregledi koje bi trebali koristiti često koriste složen tehnički jezik, nemaju važne informacije o kontekstu i obično su to dugački dokumenti koji ne moraju nužno biti lako dostupni donosiocima odluka. Stoga je nužno razviti odgovarajuće sažetke sustavnih pregleda. Nejednakosti u zdravstvu su razlike u zdravstvenim ishodima koje se mogu izbjeći. Sustavni pregledi mogu pomoći u smanjenju nejednakosti u zdravstvu promatranjem dokaza o intervencijama koje mogu djelovati na te nejednakosti. U sustavnim pregledima bilo bi potrebno razmotriti pitanje jednakosti, jer su donosioci odluka naveli da je to važno za donošenje odluka i politika. Međutim, to znači da bi autori sustavnih pregleda trebali razmotriti učinke intervencija u različitim podskupinama populacije koje mogu imati veći rizik od nejednakosti. U ovoj disertaciji 1) istražen je proces koji opisuje akronim PROGRESS-Plus. Taj akronim obuhvaća razmatranje mjesta stanovanja, rase/etniciteta/kulture/jezika, zaposlenja, spola, religije, stupnja obrazovanja, socioekonomskog statusa i društvenog kapitala. Procjena po tom akronimu pomaže autorima sustavnih pregleda u prepoznavanju pojedinačnih ugroženih populacija, 2) proveden je sustavni pregled čiji je cilj bila procjena djelotvornosti sažetaka o dokazima među donosiocima odluka i upraviteljima u zdravstvenom sustavu s ciljem korištenja dokaza iz sustavnih pregleda, i 3) provedeno je istraživanje među korisnicima o pilot uzorku sažetaka sustavnih pregleda. Sustavni pregled dokaza o sažetcima zaključio je da je pristup postupnog ulaza povećao korisnost tih sažetaka. Takav format je zatim korišten kako bi se napravili sažetci na temelju formata E4E (engl. Evidence for Equity). Ti pilot sažetci pozitivno su ocijenjeni od strane donosioca odluka, koji su dali i korisne komentare za poboljšanje izgleda i prezentacije dokaza, što bi povećalo njihovu vrijednost i iskoristivost.
Keywords
Keywords (croatian)
Languageenglish
URN:NBNurn:nbn:hr:171:824300
Study programmeTitle: Translational Research in Biomedicine - TRIBE
Study programme type: university
Study level: postgraduate
Academic / professional title: doktor/doktorica znanosti, interdisciplinarna područja znanosti (doktor/doktorica znanosti, interdisciplinarna područja znanosti)
Type of resourceText
File originBorn digital
Access conditionsOpen access
Terms of useLicence In copyright icon
Created on2023-05-12 11:20:46