Suchergebnisse

Despite growing interest in evidence among parliamentarians and some emerging literature on evidence use in decision making in parliaments, there is still a notable gap in knowledge on the ecosystem of evidence in parliaments. This paper seeks to contribute to filling this gap by discussing the contribution of a loose regional network, the Network of African Parliamentary Committees on Health (NEAPACOH), to the evidence ecosystem in African parliaments. Although the network was not set up to strengthen evidence use, its mechanisms for realising its goal of strengthening parliamentary committees of health to effectively tackle health challenges in Africa provide an opportunity for understanding how such networks are contributing to strengthening the weak evidence ecosystem in African parliaments. The authors have been involved in the work of the network and therefore use this network for this study purposively. Data were gathered through document review and 34 in-depth interviews with parliamentarians, parliament staff and development partners. Results show that, in a context of weak institutional support and technical capacity to enable evidence use in African parliaments, the network's activities respond to some of the key barriers hindering parliamentarians from using evidence, including: limited access to evidence, complexity of evidence, weak capacity to understand evidence, and weak/lacking linkages with researchers/experts. Apart from generating demand, providing evidence, building capacity for increased evidence use, and linking MPs and researchers/experts, the network creates a sense of competition among countries by requiring countries to make commitments and report progress against the commitments annually, which provide impetus for action.

BACKGROUND: Lung health is a critical area for research in sub-Saharan Africa. The International Multidisciplinary Programme to Address Lung Health and TB in Africa (IMPALA) is a collaborative programme that seeks to fill evidence gaps to address high-burden lung health issues in Africa. In order to generate demand for and facilitate use of IMPALA research by policy-makers and other decision-makers at the regional level, an analysis of regional lung health policies and stakeholders will be undertaken to inform a programmatic strategy for policy engagement. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This analysis will be conducted in three phases. The first phase will be a rapid desk review of regional lung health policies and stakeholders that seeks to understand the regional lung health policy landscape, which issues are prioritised in existing regional policy, key regional actors, and opportunities for engagement with key stakeholders. The second phase will be a rapid desk review of the scientific literature, expanding on the work in the first phase by looking at the external factors that influence regional lung health policy, the ways in which regional bodies influence policy at the national level, investments in lung health, structures for discussion and advocacy, and the role of evidence at the regional level. The third phase will involve a survey of IMPALA partners and researchers as well as interviews with key regional stakeholders to further shed light on regional policies, including policy priorities and gaps, policy implementation status and challenges, stakeholders, and platforms for engagement and promoting uptake of evidence. DISCUSSION: Health policy analysis provides insights into power dynamics and the political nature of the prioritisation of health issues, which are often overlooked. In order to ensure the uptake of new knowledge and evidence generated by IMPALA, it is important to consider these complex factors.

Background Lung health is a critical area for research in sub-Saharan Africa. The International Multidisciplinary Programme to Address Lung Health and TB in Africa (IMPALA) is a collaborative programme that seeks to fill evidence gaps to address high-burden lung health issues in Africa. In order to generate demand for and facilitate use of IMPALA research by policy-makers and other decision-makers at the regional level, an analysis of regional lung health policies and stakeholders will be undertaken to inform a programmatic strategy for policy engagement. Methods and analysis This analysis will be conducted in three phases. The first phase will be a rapid desk review of regional lung health policies and stakeholders that seeks to understand the regional lung health policy landscape, which issues are prioritised in existing regional policy, key regional actors, and opportunities for engagement with key stakeholders. The second phase will be a rapid desk review of the scientific literature, expanding on the work in the first phase by looking at the external factors that influence regional lung health policy, the ways in which regional bodies influence policy at the national level, investments in lung health, structures for discussion and advocacy, and the role of evidence at the regional level. The third phase will involve a survey of IMPALA partners and researchers as well as interviews with key regional stakeholders to further shed light on regional policies, including policy priorities and gaps, policy implementation status and challenges, stakeholders, and platforms for engagement and promoting uptake of evidence. Discussion Health policy analysis provides insights into power dynamics and the political nature of the prioritisation of health issues, which are often overlooked. In order to ensure the uptake of new knowledge and evidence generated by IMPALA, it is important to consider these complex factors.