Predicting research use in a public health policy environment: results of a logistic regression analysis

BackgroundUse of research evidence in public health policy decision-making is affected by a range of contextual factors operating at the individual, organisational and external levels. Context-specific research is needed to target and tailor research translation intervention design and implementation to ensure that factors affecting research in a specific context are addressed. Whilst such research is increasing, there remain relatively few studies that have quantitatively assessed the factors that predict research use in specific public health policy environments.MethodA quantitative survey was designed and implemented within two public health policy agencies in the Australian state of Victoria. Binary logistic regression analyses were conducted on survey data provided by 372 participants. Univariate logistic regression analyses of 49 factors revealed 26 factors that significantly predicted research use independently. The 26 factors were then tested in a single model and five factors emerged as significant predictors of research over and above all other factors.ResultsThe five key factors that significantly predicted research use were the following: relevance of research to day-to-day decision-making, skills for research use, internal prompts for use of research, intention to use research within the next 12 months and the agency for which the individual worked.ConclusionsThese findings suggest that individual- and organisational-level factors are the critical factors to target in the design of interventions aiming to increase research use in this context. In particular, relevance of research and skills for research use would be necessary to target. The likelihood for research use increased 11- and 4-fold for those who rated highly on these factors. This study builds on previous research and contributes to the currently limited number of quantitative studies that examine use of research evidence in a large sample of public health policy and program decision-makers within a specific context. The survey used in this study is likely to be relevant for use in other public health policy contexts.

[1]  J. Grimshaw,et al.  Knowledge translation of research findings , 2012, Implementation Science.

[2]  F. Chagnon,et al.  articleComparison of determinants of research knowledge utilization by practitioners and administrators in the field of child and family social services , 2010 .

[3]  A. Kothari,et al.  Is research working for you? validating a tool to examine the capacity of health organizations to use research , 2009, Implementation science : IS.

[4]  B. Reeves,et al.  Critical appraisal skills training for health care professionals: a randomized controlled trial [ISRCTN46272378] , 2004, BMC medical education.

[5]  Robert F. DeVellis,et al.  Scale Development: Theory and Applications. , 1992 .

[6]  L. Trevena,et al.  Getting evidence into policy: The need for deliberative strategies? , 2011, Social science & medicine.

[7]  D. Streiner.  Starting at the Beginning: An Introduction to Coefficient Alpha and Internal Consistency , 2003, Journal of personality assessment.

[8]  S. Chapman,et al.  From "our world" to the "real world": Exploring the views and behaviour of policy-influential Australian public health researchers. , 2011, Social science & medicine.

[9]  C. Abraham,et al.  Making psychological theory useful for implementing evidence based practice: a consensus approach , 2005, Quality and Safety in Health Care.

[10]  S. Redman,et al.  What works to increase the use of research in population health policy and programmes: a review , 2011 .

[11]  C. Weiss,et al.  Social scientists and decision makers look at the usefulness of mental health research. , 1981, The American psychologist.

[12]  I. Ajzen,et al.  From Intentions to Behavior: Implementation Intention, Commitment, and Conscientiousness , 2009 .

[13]  Nabil Amara,et al.  New Evidence on Instrumental, Conceptual, and Symbolic Utilization of University Research in Government Agencies , 2004 .

[14]  Shawna L. Mercer,et al.  A randomized controlled trial evaluating the impact of knowledge translation and exchange strategies , 2009, Implementation science : IS.

[15]  K. Emmons,et al.  How can we increase translation of research into practice? Types of evidence needed. , 2007, Annual review of public health.

[16]  Sandy Oliver,et al.  Guidance for Evidence-Informed Policies about Health Systems: Linking Guidance Development to Policy Development , 2012, PLoS medicine.

[17]  A. Zwi,et al.  Increasing the use of evidence in health policy: practice and views of policy makers and researchers , 2009, Australia and New Zealand health policy.

[18]  P. Davies.  The State of Evidence-Based Policy Evaluation and its Role in Policy Formation , 2012, National Institute Economic Review.

[19]  B. Head,et al.  Are policy-makers interested in social research? Exploring the sources and uses of valued information among public servants in Australia , 2014 .

[20]  T. Lorenc,et al.  A systematic review of barriers to and facilitators of the use of evidence by policymakers , 2014, BMC Health Services Research.

[21]  G. Maio,et al.  Contemporary perspectives on the psychology of attitudes , 2004 .

[22]  Jo Rycroft-Malone,et al.  The role of evidence, context, and facilitation in an implementation trial: implications for the development of the PARIHS framework , 2013, Implementation Science.

[23]  K. Hofman,et al.  Implementation Science , 2007, Science.

[24]  John N Lavis,et al.  Determining research knowledge infrastructure for healthcare systems: a qualitative study , 2011, Implementation science : IS.

[25]  J. Lavis,et al.  Correlates of consulting research evidence among policy analysts in government ministries: a cross-sectional survey , 2010 .

[26]  N. Sewankambo,et al.  Assessing country-level efforts to link research to action. , 2006, Bulletin of the World Health Organization.

[27]  A. Zwi,et al.  Pathways to “Evidence-Informed” Policy and Practice: A Framework for Action , 2005, PLoS medicine.

[28]  John N. Lavis,et al.  How Can We Support the Use of Systematic Reviews in Policymaking? , 2009, PLoS medicine.

[29]  T. Greenhalgh,et al.  Realist review - a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions , 2005, Journal of health services research & policy.

[30]  Simon Chapman,et al.  Galvanizers, guides, champions, and shields: the many ways that policymakers use public health researchers. , 2011, The Milbank quarterly.

[31]  J. Denis,et al.  Creating Receptor Capacity for Research in the Health System: The Executive Training for Research Application (Extra) Program in Canada , 2008, Journal of health services research & policy.

[32]  A. Oxman,et al.  Health policy-makers' perceptions of their use of evidence: a systematic review , 2002, Journal of health services research & policy.

[33]  M. Charns,et al.  Institutionalizing evidence-based practice: an organizational case study using a model of strategic change , 2009, Implementation science : IS.

[34]  Stanley Lemeshow,et al.  Applied Logistic Regression, Second Edition , 1989 .

[35]  Réjean Landry,et al.  The Extent and Determinants of the Utilization of University Research in Government Agencies , 2003 .

[36]  G. Robert,et al.  Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: systematic review and recommendations. , 2004, The Milbank quarterly.

[37]  Martin O'Flaherty,et al.  The Use of Research Evidence in Public Health Decision Making Processes: Systematic Review , 2011, PloS one.

[38]  C. Weiss.  The many meanings of research utilization. , 1979 .

[39]  B. Head,et al.  Perspectives of Academic Social Scientists on Knowledge Transfer and Research Collaborations: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Australian Academics. , 2012 .

[40]  John Lavis,et al.  Measuring the impact of health research , 2003, Journal of health services research & policy.

[41]  Les Rymer,et al.  Measuring the Impact of Research--The Context for Metric Development. Go8 Backgrounder 23. , 2011 .

[42]  A. Ritter.  How do drug policy makers access research evidence? , 2009, The International journal on drug policy.

[43]  C. Weiss,et al.  TRUTH TESTS AND UTILITY TESTS: DECISION-MAKERS' FRAMES OF REFERENCE FOR SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH* , 1980 .

[44]  C. Adair,et al.  Knowledge transfer and exchange: review and synthesis of the literature. , 2007, The Milbank quarterly.

[45]  John W. Kingdon.  Agendas, alternatives, and public policies , 1984 .