Understanding evidence: a statewide survey to explore evidence-informed public health decision-making in a local government setting (original) (raw)
Armstrong, Rebecca, Waters, Elizabeth, Moore, Laurence 
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2182-823X, Dobbins, Maureen, Pettman, Tahna, Burns, Cate, Swinburn, Boyd, Anderson, Laurie and Petticrew, Mark(2014) Understanding evidence: a statewide survey to explore evidence-informed public health decision-making in a local government setting.Implementation Science, 9(1), p. 188. (doi: 10.1186/s13012-014-0188-7) (PMID:25496505) (PMCID:PMC4314798)
Publisher's URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-014-0188-7
Abstract
Background
The value placed on types of evidence within decision-making contexts is highly dependent on individuals, the organizations in which the work and the systems and sectors they operate in. Decision-making processes too are highly contextual. Understanding the values placed on evidence and processes guiding decision-making is crucial to designing strategies to support evidence-informed decision-making (EIDM). This paper describes how evidence is used to inform local government (LG) public health decisions.MethodsThe study used mixed methods including a cross-sectional survey and interviews. The Evidence-Informed Decision-Making Tool (EvIDenT) survey was designed to assess three key domains likely to impact on EIDM: access, confidence, and organizational culture. Other elements included the usefulness and influence of sources of evidence (people/groups and resources), skills and barriers, and facilitators to EIDM. Forty-five LGs from Victoria, Australia agreed to participate in the survey and up to four people from each organization were invited to complete the survey (n?=?175). To further explore definitions of evidence and generate experiential data on EIDM practice, key informant interviews were conducted with a range of LG employees working in areas relevant to public health.ResultsIn total, 135 responses were received (75% response rate) and 13 interviews were conducted. Analysis revealed varying levels of access, confidence and organizational culture to support EIDM. Significant relationships were found between domains: confidence, culture and access to research evidence. Some forms of evidence (e.g. community views) appeared to be used more commonly and at the expense of others (e.g. research evidence). Overall, a mixture of evidence (but more internal than external evidence) was influential in public health decision-making in councils. By comparison, a mixture of evidence (but more external than internal evidence) was deemed to be useful in public health decision-making.ConclusionsThis study makes an important contribution to understanding how evidence is used within the public health LG context.| Item Type: | Articles |
|---|---|
| Status: | Published |
| Refereed: | Yes |
| Glasgow Author(s) Enlighten ID: | Anderson, Dr Laurie and Petticrew, Dr Mark and Moore, Professor Laurence and Waters, Professor Elizabeth |
| Authors: | Armstrong, R., Waters, E., Moore, L., Dobbins, M., Pettman, T., Burns, C., Swinburn, B., Anderson, L., and Petticrew, M. |
| College/School: | College of Medical Veterinary and Life Sciences > School of Biodiversity, One Health & Veterinary MedicineCollege of Medical Veterinary and Life Sciences > School of Health & Wellbeing > MRC/CSO SPHSU |
| Journal Name: | Implementation Science |
| Publisher: | BioMed Central |
| ISSN: | 1748-5908 |
| Copyright Holders: | Copyright © 2014 The Authors |
| First Published: | First published in Implementation Science 9(1):188 |
| Publisher Policy: | Reproduced under a Creative Commons License |
University Staff: Request a correction | Enlighten Editors: Update this record
Deposit and Record Details
| ID Code: | 101710 |
|---|---|
| Depositing User: | Dr Aniko Szilagyi |
| Datestamp: | 23 Jan 2015 14:47 |
| Last Modified: | 02 May 2025 04:40 |
| Date of first online publication: | 2014 |
| Date Deposited: | 15 December 2015 |