Evidence based policy: proceed with care.
By N. Black. British medical journal, 2001
606 citations recorded by the source corpus.
# Evidence based policy: proceed with care {#article-title-2} The emergence of evidence based medicine in the early 1990s led to some clinicians challenging managers and policymakers to be equally evidence based in their policymaking. This demand was shared by some health policy analysts: “At a time when ministers are arguing that medicine should be evidence-based, is it not reasonable to suggest that this should also apply to health policy? If doctors are expected to base their decisions on the findings of research surely politicians should do the same … the case for evidence-based policymaking is difficult to refute.”1 The need to be seen to be making evidence based decisions has permeated all areas of British public policy. The government has proclaimed the need for evidence based policing, and the 1998 strategic defence review introduced evidence based defence.2 In the health sector, the concept of evidence based policy has gained ground, and a journal has been launched devoted to this challenge ( Journal of Evidence Based Health Policy and Management). Despite some groups using evidence based policy as a fig leaf, it seems difficult to argue with the idea that scientific research should drive policy. However, before accepting the argument we need to understand the implied model of policymaking. #### Summary points Evidence based policy is being encouraged in all areas of public service, including health care Research currently has little direct influence on health services policy or governance policies The implicit assumption of a linear relation between research evidence and policy needs to be replaced with a more interactive model Researchers need a better understanding of the policy process, funding bodies must change their conception of how research influences policy, and policy makers should become more involved in the conceptualisation and conduct of research Until then, researchers should be cautious about uncritically accepting the notion of evidence based policy In …
Subfields: General Health Professions
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/bdc1752683bd6dc65351a5e512f2597f4f47798f
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In General Health Professions
Citations in the corpus
- How can research organizations more effectively transfer research knowledge to decision makers? (2003, background): “…individual) decision-making environments to managerial and policy decision-making environments, for example, the organizational and political factors with which research knowledge must compete to influence the decision-making process become more apparent (Black 2001a; Walshe and Rundall 2001).”
- What makes clinical research in developing countries ethical? The benchmarks of ethical research. (2004, background): “Unless research generates reliable and valid data that can be interpreted and used by the specified beneficiaries of the research, it will have no social value, and participants will be exposed to risks for no benefits [25, 37].”
- Knowledge translation in health research: A novel approach to health sciences education (2009, positive): “’’(1) Nonetheless, it is well-documented that evidence-based health research per se currently does not have a large direct influence on policymakers, administrators, or clinicians, due to a variety of political, organizational, procedural, financial and other factors.(1,2) Successful research implem”
- Evidence-based policy or policy-based evidence gathering? Biofuels, the EU and the 10% target† (2010, background): “Narrow interpretations which rely on a strictly linear relationship between evidence and policy have been criticised as technocratic (Black, 2001) and are now recognised as less suitable for situations where scientific evidence is uncertain.”