Table 5 Outcomes evaluation survey
Attribute | Nigeria (n = 66) | Zambia (n = 48) |
|---|---|---|
Mean score (out of 7) | Mean score (out of 7) | |
How often was relevant research evidence about high-priority policy issues easily available to policymakers? a | ||
Copies of articles or reports about primary research on high-priority policy issues were widely disseminated to policymakers working on these issues | 4.3 | 3.2 |
Systematic reviews of the research literature on high-priority policy issues were widely disseminated to policymakers working on these issues | 4.2 | 3.1 |
Policy briefs that described research evidence about a high-priority problem, options for addressing the problem and key implementation considerations were widely disseminated to policymakers working on these issues | 4.5 | 3.5 |
Policymakers had access to a personal computer with a functional internet connection | 3.7 | 4.4 |
Policymakers had access to research evidence on high-priority policy issues through a searchable database focused on these issues | 3.9 | 4.1 |
Policymakers had access to research evidence on high-priority policy issues through a service operated by researchers and designed to respond in a timely way to questions about these issues | 3.9 | 3.3 |
Research evidence concerning high-priority policy issues was available | 4.5 | 3.8 |
The research evidence available to policymakers yielded information that could help them address high-priority policy issues | 4.6 | 3.8 |
How often did policymakers and researchers interact in the following ways? | ||
Policymakers interacted with researchers as part of a priority setting process to identify high priority policy issues for which primary research and systematic reviews were needed | 3.9 | 3.2 |
Policymakers interacted with researchers as part of the process of conducting primary research or systematic reviews about high-priority policy issues | 4.1 | 3.1 |
Policymakers interacted with researchers to obtain assistance with finding and using research evidence about high-priority policy issues | 4.1 | 3.2 |
Policymakers interacted with researchers through targeted efforts to support research use in policymaking | 4.0 | 3.3 |
Policymakers interacted with researchers on an informal basis (i.e. through membership of committees, personal conversations) | 4.4 | 3.6 |
How often did policymakers develop and demonstrate their capacity to find and use health research evidence in health systems policymaking? | ||
Policymakers participated in training to develop their capacity to find and use research evidence about high-priority policy issues | 4.6 | 3.1 |
Policymakers acquired research evidence on high-priority policy issues | 4.4 | 3.5 |
Policymakers assessed the quality and local applicability of research evidence on high-priority policy issues | 4.3 | 3.4 |
Policymakers conveyed research evidence on high-priority policy issues to stakeholders in a useful way | 4.6 | 3.4 |
Policymakers identified or created place for research evidence in decision-making processes | 4.4 | 3.4 |
To what extent do you agree or disagree with these statements about the Knowledge Translation (KT) platforms contributions over the last 2 years b | ||
The KT platform has contributed to enhancing the availability of relevant research evidence on high-priority issues | 5.7 | 5.4 |
The KT platform has contributed to strengthening relationships among policymakers and researchers | 5.6 | 5.4 |
The KT platform has contributed to strengthening policymakers capacity to find and use research evidence in health systems policymaking | 5.8 | 5.2 |