Search

IntroductionIn order to promote evidence-informed health policy-making (EIHP) and address its challenges, it is necessary to measure it more objectively. In this study, as part of a bigger study entitled “A roadmap for strengthening evidence-informed health policy-making in Iran”, we tried to develop a tool to measure the instrumental use of evidence in health policy-making and to utilize it. MethodsWe performed literature review and in-depth interviews to develop and standardize the SASHA tool. The SASHA tool was developed based on the policy-making cycle and the evidence required for each cycle in five sections, clarifying the problem, identifying and selecting appropriate solutions, contextualizing, implementing, and monitoring & evaluation of the selected solutions. After standardizing the tool, we assessed 14 policies/programs using document review and semi-structured interviews with key persons related to each policy. Results Based on our results, the SASHA tool is an appropriate tool for guiding and measuring evidence-informed policy-making. SASHA has been successful in certain aspects and unsuccessful in others in objectively measuring the EIHP status. The most important limitation in this regard was the lack of policy-making documentation that makes policy-makers the only sources of data, which not only imposes information bias but also reduces the possibility of data triangulation. The role of evidence derived from systematic reviews and secondary data analysis was very poor.ConclusionThis study has shown that the feasibility of the SASHA tool in objectively measuring EIHP depends on the availability of data on decision-making processes throughout policy-making cycles. The policymaker’s experience is dominant in problem identification and agenda-setting and the roles of systematic reviews and secondary data analysis are weak in all policy cycle stages.

Background Various interventions have been undertaken in Iran to promote evidence-informed health policy-making (EIHP). Identifying the challenges in EIHP is the first step toward strengthening EIHP in each country through the design of tailored interventions. Therefore, the current study was conducted to synthesize the results of earlier studies and to finalize the list of barriers to EIHP in Iran. Methods To identify the barriers to EIHP in Iran, two steps were taken: a systematic review and policy dialogue. To conduct the systematic review, three Iranian databases and PubMed, Health Systems Evidence (HSE), Embase, and Scopus were searched. The reference lists of included papers and documentation from some local organizations were hand-searched. Upon conducting the systematic review, given the significance of stakeholders in clarifying the problem of EIHP, policy dialogue was used to complete the list previously extracted and to do advocacy. Selection criteria for the stakeholders included influential and informed individuals from knowledge-producing, knowledge-utilizing, and knowledge-brokering organizations. Semi-structured interviews were held with three important absent stakeholders. Results Challenges specific to Iran that were identified included the lack of integration of the health ministry and the medical universities, lack of ties between health knowledge utilization organizations, failure to establish long-term research plans, neglect of national research needs at the time of recruiting human resources in knowledge-producing organizations, and duplication and lack of coordination in routine data obtained from surveillance systems, disease registration systems, and censuses. It seems that some challenges are common across countries, including neglecting the importance of inter- and intra-disciplinary studies, the capacity of policy-makers and managers to utilize evidence, the criteria for evaluating the performance of policy-makers, managers, and academic members, the absence of long-term programmes in knowledge-utilizing organizations, the rapid replacement of policy-makers and managers, and lack of use of evaluation studies. Conclusions In this study, we tried to identify the challenges regarding EIHP in Iran using a systematic review and policy dialogue approach. This is the first step toward determining the best interventions to improve evidence-informed policy-making in each country, because these challenges are contextual and need to be investigated contextually.

Background Many initiatives have been taken in the Islamic Republic of Iran to promote evidence-informed health policy-making (EIHP). However, these initiatives are not systematic. Since the implementation of EIHP is not consistent and the interventions in this regard are complex, a comprehensive plan could be a useful tool for employing initiatives to achieve and promote EIHP. Hence, this study aims to develop a roadmap for strengthening EIHP over a 3-year period in Iran. Methods Nine projects will be conducted to define the roadmap for strengthening EIHP. These projects include two reviews and a stakeholder analysis to identify the factors that facilitate or hinder achieving EIHP. The next study will be a qualitative study to prioritise the challenges and outline the main causes. The following steps will be a review of reviews to extract global experiences on interventions used for strengthening EIHP and two qualitative studies to examine the adoption of these interventions and develop an operational plan for strengthening EIHP in Iran. The research will be completed through conducting two qualitative-quantitative studies to design a tool for measuring EIHP and assessing EIHP in Iran at baseline. Discussion This national EIHP roadmap will surely be able to identify the gaps and bumps that might exist in the implementation plan for establishing EIHP and eliminate them as needed in the future. This roadmap can be a step in moving towards transparency and accountability in the health system and as thus towards good governance and improvement of the health system’s performance. Although the plan can be a good model for developing countries and may promote the use of evidence in health policy-making, we should assume that there are some critical contextual factors that could potentially hinder the complete and successful implementation of EIHP. Thus, to enhance EIHP in these countries with a policy-making context that does not fully support the use of evidence, it is crucial to think about not only those interventions that directly address the EIHP barriers, but also some long-term strategies to make required changes in the context, both beyond and within the health system.

Background: Universal health coverage (UHC) is the desired goal of achieving universal access to health services without having to endure pain and financial difficulties. Multiple factors can help steer countries toward UHC. One of the most important factors is the production of valid quality evidence that can be achieved through research. The present study aimed at outlining the status of research systems in UHC–related organizations and identifying the barriers faced by research. Methods: The key individuals and organizations that could provide rich, relevant, and diverse data in response to the research question were purposively selected for the interviews. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the interviews. Categories and subcategories were deductively extracted from the text based on research system performance as follows: resource provision, production and utilization of knowledge, existing resources, and stewardship. Then, the themes were inductively extracted from the interviews. Results: Many barriers existed for performing research in UHC–related organizations. The stewardship barrier seemed to play a key role such that structural changes in organizations affected the production & utilization of evidence. Limited financial and human resources were evident in most of the organizations. Research questions were not comprehensively identified. The conducted studies either were not designed to answer the relevant questions and/or were not appropriately reported to policy makers. As a result, their implementation in decision- making did not reach the ideal status. Conclusion: Research utilization aimed at achieving UHC will come to realize only when and if research is conducted to produce evidence required for decision–making and implementation. Therefore, in addition to the interventions recommended by the World Health Organization, we should design and implement interventions tailored to the local barriers and needs of UHC–related organizations.

Background: The ultimate goal of health systems is creating a healthy community through the efficient and equitable provision of health services. The proportion of equity and efficiency of health systems indicates the quality of their practice. This systematic review aims to seek evidence that show any effect of resource allocation decisions on efficiency and equity in health worldwide. Methods: Five databases including PubMed, Scopus, Ovid, ProQuest, and EBSCOHOST were searched from 1992 to 2014. Based on the inclusion criteria, 527 papers were identified, of which 11 were assessed and analyzed. Results: The 11 included studies have been conducted in different countries including USA, North Africa, Greece, China, Australia, Taiwan, and South Africa. The main methods for resource allocation included: linear programming, Markov model, cost-effectiveness analysis, per capita resource allocation, modelling the resource allocation. Conclusion: Linear and mathematical programming methods, and economic models such as Markov models can lead to equity and efficiency to some extent. These models take into account the details of treatment methods, the population under treatment, and costs of health services. &nbsp

Background Following approximately 10 years from the beginning of Iran’s national Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme, the present study aims to evaluate its success by examining the impact of HTA and identifying the determinant factors leading to the implementation of HTA report results. Methods The triangulation method was employed herein. HTA reports were initially identified and their impact and determinant factors were then examined from the perspectives of both researchers (by preparing a questionnaire according to the Payback model and sending it to HTA principle investigators) and stakeholders (semi-structured interviews held with each HTA stakeholder). Simultaneously, the quality of the HTA reports was examined with relevant critical appraisal checklists. Results The impact of 19 equipment technologies and four pharmaceutical technologies were assessed in this study. Twenty researchers replied (response rate, 86.96%) to the questionnaire on the impact of HTA reports from the researcher’s perspective. To assess the impact of HTA reports from the stakeholder’s perspective, seven policy-makers were chosen and interviewed as the main target audience. The most common step taken to disseminate the results of the HTA projects was publication. Conducting the HTA had taught researchers and their colleagues’ new skills and had facilitated the securing of research grants from other organisations. Most reports had used the systematic review method but the relevant details had been scarcely presented regarding outcomes, costs and analysis. The greatest impact of HTA reports on decision-making had been on policy-makers providing and allocating finances. Barriers in stewardship, identification and prioritisation of topics, performance and dissemination of HTA results were the main barriers of implementing HTAs. Conclusions In most aspects, the status of HTA impact reports need improvement. Thus far, the barriers and facilitators of the HTA programme in Iran have been investigated in other studies. These findings should be pooled to reach a solution that can be actively applied to the health system to improve the status quo of HTA in Iran.

Background Following approximately 10 years from the beginning of Iran’s national Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme, the present study aims to evaluate its success by examining the impact of HTA and identifying the determinant factors leading to the implementation of HTA report results. Methods The triangulation method was employed herein. HTA reports were initially identified and their impact and determinant factors were then examined from the perspectives of both researchers (by preparing a questionnaire according to the Payback model and sending it to HTA principle investigators) and stakeholders (semi-structured interviews held with each HTA stakeholder). Simultaneously, the quality of the HTA reports was examined with relevant critical appraisal checklists. Results The impact of 19 equipment technologies and four pharmaceutical technologies were assessed in this study. Twenty researchers replied (response rate, 86.96%) to the questionnaire on the impact of HTA reports from the researcher’s perspective. To assess the impact of HTA reports from the stakeholder’s perspective, seven policy-makers were chosen and interviewed as the main target audience. The most common step taken to disseminate the results of the HTA projects was publication. Conducting the HTA had taught researchers and their colleagues’ new skills and had facilitated the securing of research grants from other organisations. Most reports had used the systematic review method but the relevant details had been scarcely presented regarding outcomes, costs and analysis. The greatest impact of HTA reports on decision-making had been on policy-makers providing and allocating finances. Barriers in stewardship, identification and prioritisation of topics, performance and dissemination of HTA results were the main barriers of implementing HTAs. Conclusions In most aspects, the status of HTA impact reports need improvement. Thus far, the barriers and facilitators of the HTA programme in Iran have been investigated in other studies. These findings should be pooled to reach a solution that can be actively applied to the health system to improve the status quo of HTA in Iran. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12961-018-0286-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background: Formoterol and salmeterol are two long-acting β2-agonists given by inhalation, with bronchodilating effects lasting for at least 12 h after a single administration. Formoterol has a faster onset of action compared with salmeterol. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on the data published from previous review in order to calculate pooled estimates of effectiveness and safety assessment of formoterol and salmeterol in treatment of patients with asthma. Materials and Methods: In this study, we conducted an electronic search for medical citation databases including Cochrane, PubMed, Scopus, PsycInfo, and IranMedex. Besides manual search of the databases that record randomized clinical trials, conference proceedings, and journals related to asthma were included. Studies were evaluated by two independent people based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, and the common outcomes of studies were entered into the RevMan 5.0.1 software, after evaluation of studies and extraction of data from them; and in cases where there were homogeneous studies, meta-analysis was performed, and for heterogeneous studies, the results were reported qualitatively. Results: Of the 1539 studies initially found, 13 were included in the study. According to the meta-analysis conducted, no significant difference was found between the inhalation of formoterol 12 μg and salmeterol 50 μg in the two outcomes of mean forced expiratory volume 1 s (FEV1), 12 h after inhalation of medication and Borg score (A frequently used scale for quantifying breathlessness) after inhalation of medication. In addition, salmeterol was more effective than formoterol in the two outcomes of percent decrease in FEV1 after inhalation of methacholine and the number of days without an attack. Since the two outcomes of FEV1 30-60 min after inhalation of medication and morning peak expiratory flow after inhalation of medication were heterogeneous, they had no meta-analysis capabilities, and its results were reported qualitatively. Conclusion: The data from included studies shows that, more efficacy has been achieved with Salmeterol, especially in some outcomes such as the percent decrease in FEV1 after inhalation of Methacholine, and the number of days without an attack; and therefore, the administration of Salmeterol seems to be beneficial for patients, compared with Formoterol.

Background: Hospitals with health technology assessment (HTA) programs have reported its positive effects on the management of resources and costs. This study aimed to identify the barriers faced by hospital-based HTA (HBHTA) in Iran by inductive content analysis of stakeholders’ and decision-makers’ points of view.Methods: The key individuals and organizations that could provide rich, relevant, and diverse data in response to the research question were purposively selected for the interviews and focus group discussion.Results: Twelve stakeholders from seven public hospitals participated in the interviews. Another eighteen stakeholders from twelve HBHTA-related organizations took part in the focus group discussion. Most of the hospitals’ senior management team did not feel the need for HBHTA and believed that in Iran a systematic process like HTA faces many challenges.Conclusions: The stakeholders participating in this study highlighted the significance of certain points that needed to be addressed before establishing HBHTA in Iran.

Background In recent years, Iran has made significant developments in the field of health sciences. However, the question is whether this considerable increase has affected public health. The research budget has always been negligible and unsustainable in developing countries. Hence, using the Payback Framework, we conducted this study to evaluate the impact of health research in Iran. Methods By using a cross-sectional method and two-stage stratified cluster sampling, the projects were randomly selected from six medical universities. A questionnaire was designed according to the Payback Framework and completed by the principle investigators of the randomly selected projects. Results The response rate was 70.4%. Ten point twenty-four percent (10.24%) of the studies had been ordered by a knowledge user organization. The average number of articles published in journals per project was 0.96, and half of the studies had no articles published in Scopus. The results of 12% of the studies had been used in systematic review articles and the same proportion had been utilized in clinical or public health guidelines. The results of 5.3% of the studies had been implemented in the Health Ministry’s policymaking. 62% of the studies were expected to affect health directly, 38% of them had been implemented, and among the latter 60% had achieved the expected results. Concerning the economic impacts, the most common expected impact was the reduction of ‘days of work missed because of illness or disability’ and impact on personal and health system costs. About 36% of these studies had been implemented, and 61% had achieved the expected impact. Conclusion In most aspects, the status of research impact needs improvement. A comparison of Iran’s ranking of knowledge creation and knowledge impact in the Global Innovation Index confirms these findings. The most important problems identified were, not conducting research based on national needs, and the lack of implementation of research results. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12961-016-0129-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background: Health technology assessment (HTA) is a tool utilized for efficient dissemination of technology. For the purpose of encouraging decision-makers to utilize this tool, at first, we need to identify the obstacles in the processes of preparation, utilization, and implementation of HTAs. This study aims to define these barriers and offer solutions for effective utilization of HTA reports produced in Iran. Methods: This qualitative content analysis determines the various beneficiaries of HTA, and utilizes a semi-structured interview with the participants who are all involved in the HTA. Results: Nine out of ten people invited for the interviews accepted the researchers’ invitation. An analysis of barriers and solutions for improving the utilization of HTA reports was conducted in three levels of policy makers (policy level), specialists in healthcare (professional level), and ordinary people (public level). The barriers in the policy level include unsuitability of reports for their audience, incompatible views toward the definition and necessity of health technology assessment, lack of financial resources for report preparation, and limitations in large-scale policymaking in Ministry of Health. Barriers in the professional level include lack of knowledge on HTA among serviceproviders. Barriers in the public level consist of information asymmetry. Conclusion: There are various barriers toward accurate utilization of HTAs in Iran. Thus, a systematic approach which involves people, brings about culture, improves infrastructures, and boosts supervision on the performance is recommended.