Abstract
BackgroundResponsibility for public health in England transferred from the National Health Service to local authorities in 2013, representing a different decision-making environment. Systematic reviews are considered the gold standard of evidence for clinical decision-making but little is known about their use in local government public health. This study aimed to explore the extent to which public health decision-makers in local authorities engage with systematic reviews and how they do so.MethodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted with senior public health practitioners (n = 14) in Yorkshire and the Humber local authorities. Sampling was purposive and involved contacting Directors of Public Health directly and snowballing through key contacts. Face-to-face or telephone interviews were digitally recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using the Framework Method.ResultsPublic health practitioners described using systematic reviews directly in decision-making and engaging with them more widely in a range of ways, often through a personal commitment to professional development. They saw themselves as having a role to advocate for the use of rigorous evidence, including systematic reviews, in the wider local authority. Systematic reviews were highly valued in principle and public health practitioners had relevant skills to find and appraise them. However, the extent of use varied by individual and local authority and was limited by the complexity of decision-making and various barriers. Barriers included that there were a limited number of systematic reviews available on certain public health topics, such as the wider determinants of health, and that the narrow focus of reviews was not reflective of complex public health decisions facing local authorities. Reviews were used alongside a range of other evidence types, including grey literature. The source of evidence was often considered an indicator of quality, with specific organisations, such as Public Health England, NICE and Cochrane, particularly trusted.ConclusionsResearch use varies and should be considered within the specific decision-making and political context. There is a need for systematic reviews to be more reflective of the decisions facing local authority public health teams.
Highlights
Responsibility for public health in England transferred from the National Health Service to local authorities in 2013, representing a different decision-making environment
The remaining three were other Public health practitioner (PHP), all of whom had a part of their remit related to evidence or research use
This study contributes to the understanding of the use of systematic reviews in decision-making, and the use of evidence in Local authority (LA) public health after the transfer of decision-making from the National Health Service (NHS)
Summary
Responsibility for public health in England transferred from the National Health Service to local authorities in 2013, representing a different decision-making environment. In 2013 responsibility for public health decision-making in England transferred from National Health Service (NHS) primary care trusts to upper-tier and unitary local authorities (LAs) as part of the Health and Social Care Act 2012. As well as commissioning these services, it was intended that public health teams could influence decisions on policy and commissioning within other parts of the authority that impacted the wider determinants of health, such as housing [1]. Senior public health professionals are trained in evidence use as part of the five-year training programme (or equivalent experience) prior to becoming registered consultants [4]. There have been large reductions in the ring-fenced public health grant since the transfer [9] and there is evidence that public health practitioners (PHPs) see themselves as having less influence or status in some ways since the transfer [5, 7, 10]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
