Abstract
The lack of effective use of research evidence in policy-making is a major challenge in most low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). There is need to package research data into effective policy tools that will help policy-makers to make evidence-informed policy regarding infectious diseases of poverty (IDP). The objective of this study was to assess the usefulness of training workshops and mentoring to enhance the capacity of Nigerian health policy-makers to develop evidence-informed policy brief on the control of IDP. A modified "before and after" intervention study design was used in which outcomes were measured on the target participants both before the intervention is implemented and after. A 4-point Likert scale according to the degree of adequacy; 1 = "grossly inadequate," 4 = "very adequate" was employed. The main parameter measured was participants' perceptions of their own knowledge/understanding. This study was conducted at subnational level and the participants were the career health policy-makers drawn from Ebonyi State in the South-Eastern Nigeria. A one-day evidence-to-policy workshop was organized to enhance the participants' capacity to develop evidence-informed policy brief on IDP in Ebonyi State. Topics covered included collaborative initiative; preparation and use of policy briefs; policy dialogue; ethics in health policy-making; and health policy and politics. The preworkshop mean of knowledge and capacity ranged from 2.49-3.03, while the postworkshop mean ranged from 3.42-3.78 on 4-point scale. The percentage increase in mean of knowledge and capacity at the end of the workshop ranged from 20.10%-45%. Participants were divided into 3 IDP mentorship groups (malaria, schistosomiasis, lymphatic filariasis [LF]) and were mentored to identify potential policy options/recommendations for control of the diseases for the policy briefs. These policy options were subjected to research evidence synthesis by each group to identify the options that have the support of research evidence (mostly systematic reviews) from PubMed, Cochrane database and Google Scholar. After the evidence synthesis, five policy options were selected out of 13 for malaria, 3 out of 10 for schistosomiasis and 5 out of 11 for LF. The outcome suggests that an evidence-to-policy capacity enhancement workshop combined with a mentorship programme can improve policy-makers' capacity for evidence-informed policy-making (EIP).
Highlights
In recent years, increasing attention has been paid to the use of research in the formulation of health policy as a way of enhancing its effectiveness.[1]
There is sufficient evidence to show it is an effective strategy for lymphatic filariasis (LF) control policy
It is pertinent to state that the result of this study clearly suggests that an evidence-to-policy capacity enhancement workshop combined with a mentorship programme can improve policy-makers’ capacity for evidence-informed policy-making (EIP)
Summary
In recent years, increasing attention has been paid to the use of research in the formulation of health policy as a way of enhancing its effectiveness.[1]. Adam and colleagues[20] observed that there is the growing recognition of the importance of developing concise materials and tools to communicate various types of information to policy-makers and those supporting them They cited several reports where this recognition has led to the development of a plethora of information-packaging efforts, which aim to support action based on the messages arising from research and other policy-relevant information.[21,22,23] There are numerous reports which have shown that the availability of timely, suitably packaged and policy relevant research evidence is important in supporting increased use of research evidence in the policy processes in LMICs.[20,21,22,23] A number of studies have shown that effective techniques for communicating research findings to decision-makers include presenting readily understandable; timely data in visually compelling formats; using illustrative anecdotes where appropriate; sending clear key messages about the meaning of data; suggesting ways to use research findings for answering important policy questions; and establishing relationships of trust and credibility with policy-makers.[24,25,26,27] In a report on preparing and using evidence-informed policy briefs to support EIP, Lavis and colleagues,[28] noted that policy brief is an effective evidence-packaging mechanism and a new approach to improving the policy-making process by supporting evidence-informed policy-making. There are reports that have indicated a strong need for capacity-building, for policy-makers to enable them have a better understanding of scientific information packaged in various policy-relevant formats, along with civil servants in a number of ministries in national and local government.[1,33,34] Oxman and colleagues[2] have argued that strengthening the use of research evidence (including through policy briefs), and the ability of policy-makers to make appropriate judgments
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
