Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 7 Summary of the evaluation of evidence briefs

From: Initiatives supporting evidence informed health system policymaking in Cameroon and Uganda: a comparative historical case study

Features of briefs produced Cameroon (n = 99) Uganda (n = 66)
Mean SD Mean SD
Overall assessment of satisfaction with the evidence briefs achieving its purpose 6.2 0.8 6.3 0.9
Design features of evidence briefs     
1. Described the context for the issue being addressed 6.3 1.2 6.2 1.4
2. Described different features of the problem, including (where possible) how it affects particular groups 6.1 1.2 6.0 1.4
3. Described options for addressing the problem 6.0 1.1 5.8 1.4
4. Described what is known, based on synthesized research evidence, about each of the options and where there are gaps in what is known 6.0 1.0 6.0 1.4
5. Described key implementation considerations 6.1 1.1 6.0 1.3
6. Employed systematic and transparent methods to identify, select, and assess synthesized research evidence 6.0 1.0 6.0 1.2
7. Took quality considerations into account when discussing the research evidence 6.1 1.0 6.0 1.3
8. Took local applicability considerations into account when discussing the research evidence 6.0 1.0 6.1 1.1
9. Took equity considerations into account when discussing the research evidence 6.2 1.1 5.8 1.1
10. Did not conclude with particular recommendations 5.4 1.3 5.4 1.9
11. Employed a graded-entry format (e.g., a list of key messages and a full report) 6.4 1.0 6.2 1.2
12. Included a reference list for those who wanted to read more about a particular systematic review or research study 6.4 1.0 6.3 1.7
13. Was subjected to a review by at least one policymaker, at least one stakeholder, and at least one researcher (called a “merit” review process to distinguish it from “peer” review, which would typically only involve researchers in the review) 6.4 0.8 6.1 1.3
  1. The ratings are on a Likert scale from 1 to 7 (least useful = 1 and most useful = 7) for question 1 to 13. The lowest rating (5.4) was for the briefs not concluding with particular recommendations. These are mean values for seven evidence briefs in Cameroon and three evidence briefs in Uganda.