Search

Background: Evidence-based public health decision-making depends on high quality and transparent accounts of what interventions are effective, for whom, how and at what cost. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized and non-randomized study designs through the CONSORT and TREND statements has had a marked impact on the quality of study designs. However, public health users of systematic reviews have been concerned with the paucity of synthesized information on context, development and rationale, implementation processes and sustainability factors., Methods: This paper examines the existing reporting frameworks for research against information sought by users of systematic reviews of public health interventions and suggests additional items that should be considered in future recommendations on the reporting of public health interventions., Results: Intervention model, theoretical and ethical considerations, study design choice, integrity of intervention/process evaluation, context, differential effects and inequalities and sustainability are often overlooked in reports of public health interventions., Conclusion: Population health policy makers need synthesized, detailed and high quality a priori accounts of effective interventions in order to make better progress in tackling population morbidities and inequalities. Adding simple criteria to reporting standards will significantly improve the quality and usefulness of published evidence and increase its impact on public health program planning.

Evidence-informed practice is a key component of public health and the focus of much discussion, of which the nature of evidence and how it is best gathered and appraised has formed a large part. Prospective registration of trials is now a key component of rigour and quality in clinical research and has been supported at an international level through the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Program. This paper discusses the scope and benefits of trial registration in clinical research, including greater transparency and reduced publication bias. It then considers the potential for a Prospective Public Health Intervention Studies Register specific to the needs of public health and aspects to be included in such a register. It is argued that this initiative has the potential to facilitate increased global cooperation and efficiency in the production of high quality evidence and ultimately in improved health outcomes for populations.

Background: There is an increased emphasis in public health research on effective models and strategies to support knowledge translation (KT), the exchange, synthesis and ethically sound application of research findings within a complex set of interactions among researchers and knowledge users. In other words, KT can be seen as an acceleration of the knowledge cycle-an acceleration of the natural transformation of knowledge into use (Canadian Institutes of Health Services Research. Knowledge Translation Strategy, 2004). The most recent conceptualizations consider the complexities of public health decision-making. The role of practitioners and communities is increasingly considered., Methods: We identify, describe and discuss the theoretical underpinnings of KT and recommend a way forward to build the evidence for more effective practice., Results: Theoretical perspectives increasingly influence research on KT in public health. A range of innovative work is being conducted to explore methods for KT using practical tools, often with the support of government., Conclusions: KT describes a crucial and to date under-developed element of the research process. There is an important gap in theoretically informed empirical studies of effectiveness of proposed approaches in public health, health promotion and preventive medicine, and thus much of the debate remains abstract. There is clearly an urgent policy need to establish the effectiveness of KT models in a range of contexts. This must include both the consideration of development and the utilization of knowledge.

Background: Evidence-informed health promotion and public health is an emerging and ever-changing theme in research and practice. A collaborative approach to gathering and applying evidence is crucial to implementing effective multi-sectoral health promotion and public health interventions for improved population outcomes. This paper presents an argument for the development of multi-sector evidence and discusses both facilitators and challenges to this process., Methods: Sector-specific contacts familiar with decision-making processes were selected from referrals gained through academic, government and non-government networks and interviewed (in-person or via telephone) as part of a small scale study to scope the use of evidence within non-health sectors where decisions are likely to impact on public health., Results: The views gathered are preliminary, and this analysis would benefit from more extensive consultation. Nonetheless, information gathered from the interviews and literature search provide valuable insights into evidence-related decision-making paradigms which demonstrate similarities with, and differences from, those found in the health sector., Conclusions: Decisions in health promotion and public may benefit from consideration of the ways in which disciplines and sectors can work together to inform policy and practice.

Background: While there is an emerging evidence base in public health, the evidence can often be difficult to find. Indexing of journals in MEDLINE has assisted those conducting systematic reviews to more easily identify published studies. However, information technology and the processes associated with indexing are not infallible. Studies may not be correctly marked by study design which may mean they are missed in the electronic searching process. Handsearching for evidence of intervention effectiveness has therefore become a recognized tool in the systematic review process., Methods: Resources to guide handsearching activity currently are clinically focused, and may not be sensitive to the characteristics of public health studies where study terminology may differ. In response to this issue, the Cochrane Health Promotion and Public Health Field (the Field) developed and implemented a small study to recruit and support handsearchers from around the world to identify health promotion and public health trials and systematic reviews. A strategic framework was developed to recruit and support handsearchers to search six public health-related journals., Results: In total, 131 trials and 21 systematic reviews were identified. The greatest value of handsearching was found to be in supplement editions and abstract sections of journals, Conclusions: The study focused exclusively on indexed journals with the intention that tools and methods developed could be used to explore the potential for handsearching in non-indexed journals and for unpublished studies. The findings from this study will continue to support handsearching efforts and in doing so contribute to high quality systematic reviews of public health interventions.

The global burden of disease and illness is primarily situated in developing countries. As developing countries have limited resources, it is particularly important to invest in public health and health promotion strategies that are effective. Systematic reviews are central to evidence-based public health and health promotion practice and policy. This paper discusses issues surrounding the relevance of evidence-based public health and systematic reviews to the health of developing countries. It argues that there is a lack of systematic reviews relevant to the health priorities of developing countries; many interventions reviewed can not be implemented in resource-poor situations; and, a limited amount of primary research is conducted in developing countries. The paper further argues that improvements in public health are determined not only by effective health services and interventions, but through an approach that includes other sectors and influences broader structural and systematic barriers to health. Given the social complexity of human development, and the inter-sections amongst different development goals, there is no question that gains in developing country public health are unlikely to emerge from systematic reviews alone, but will require decisions about inter-sectoral collaboration and social policy initiatives. Nonetheless, evidence around intervention effectiveness has an important role to play in addressing health priorities in developing countries and resource-poor areas. The public health evidence base urgently needs strengthening, with dedicated effort towards increasing the relevance of primary evidence and systematic reviews.