New thinking is needed on the age-old conundrum of how to connect research and policymaking. Why does a disconnect exist between the research community, which is producing thousands of studies relevant to public policy, and the policy community, which is making thousands of decisions that would benefit from research evidence? The second edition updates community dissonance theory and provides an even stronger, more substantiated story of why research is underutilized in policymaking, and what it will take to connect researchers and policymakers. This book offers a fresh look into what policymakers and the policy process are like, as told by policymakers themselves and the researchers who study and work with them. New to the second edition: • The point of view of policymakers is infused throughout this book based on a remarkable new study of 225 state legislators with an extraordinarily high response rate in this hard-to-access population. • A new theory holds promise for guiding the study and practice of evidence-based policy by building on how policymakers say research contributes to policymaking. • A new chapter features pioneering researchers who have effectively influenced public policy by engaging policymakers in ways rewarding to both. • A new chapter proposes how an engaged university could provide culturally competent training to create a new type of scholar and scholarship. This review of state-of-the-art research on evidence-based policy is a benefit to readers who find it hard to keep abreast of a field that spans the disciplines of business, economics, education, family sciences, health services, political science, psychology, public administration, social work, sociology, and so forth. For those who study evidence-based policy, the book provides the basics of producing policy relevant research by introducing researchers to policymakers and the policy process. Strategies are provided for identifying research questions that are relevant to the societal problems that confront and confound policymakers. Researchers will have at their fingertips a breath-taking overview of classic and cutting-edge studies on the multi-disciplinary field of evidence-based policy. For instructors, the book is written in a language and style that students find engaging. A topic that many students find mundane becomes germane when they read stories of what policymakers are like, and when they learn of researcher’s tribulations and triumphs as they work to build evidence-based policy. To point students to the most important ideas, the key concepts are highlighted in text boxes. For those who desire to engage policymakers, a new chapter summarizes the breakthroughs of several researchers who have been successful at driving policy change. The book provides 12 innovative best practices drawn from the science and practice of engaging policymakers, including insights from some of the best and brightest researchers and science communicators. The book also takes on the daunting task of evaluating the effectiveness of efforts to engage policymakers around research. A theory of change identifies seven key elements that are fundamental to increasing policymaker’s use of research along with evaluation protocols and preliminary evidence on each element.

The Open Access version of this book, available at http://www.tandfebooks.com/, has been made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 3.0 license. There has been an enormous increase in interest in the use of evidence for public policymaking, but the vast majority of work on the subject has failed to engage with the political nature of decision making and how this influences the ways in which evidence will be used (or misused) within political areas. This book provides new insights into the nature of political bias with regards to evidence and critically considers what an ‘improved’ use of evidence would look like from a policymaking perspective. Part I describes the great potential for evidence to help achieve social goals, as well as the challenges raised by the political nature of policymaking. It explores the concern of evidence advocates that political interests drive the misuse or manipulation of evidence, as well as counter-concerns of critical policy scholars about how appeals to ‘evidence-based policy’ can depoliticise political debates. Both concerns reflect forms of bias – the first representing technical bias, whereby evidence use violates principles of scientific best practice, and the second representing issue bias in how appeals to evidence can shift political debates to particular questions or marginalise policy-relevant social concerns. Part II then draws on the fields of policy studies and cognitive psychology to understand the origins and mechanisms of both forms of bias in relation to political interests and values. It illustrates how such biases are not only common, but can be much more predictable once we recognise their origins and manifestations in policy arenas. Finally, Part III discusses ways to move forward for those seeking to improve the use of evidence in public policymaking. It explores what constitutes ‘good evidence for policy’, as well as the ‘good use of evidence’ within policy processes, and considers how to build evidence-advisory institutions that embed key principles of both scientific good practice and democratic representation. Taken as a whole, the approach promoted is termed the ‘good governance of evidence’ – a concept that represents the use of rigorous, systematic and technically valid pieces of evidence within decision-making processes that are representative of, and accountable to, populations served.

"Nurses play a vital role in improving the safety and quality of patient car -- not only in the hospital or ambulatory treatment facility, but also of community-based care and the care performed by family members. Nurses need know what proven techniques and interventions they can use to enhance patient outcomes. To address this need, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), with additional funding from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, has prepared this comprehensive, 1,400-page, handbook for nurses on patient safety and quality -- Patient Safety and Quality: An Evidence-Based Handbook for Nurses. (AHRQ Publication No. 08-0043)." - online AHRQ blurb, http://www.ahrq.gov/qual/nurseshdbk/

Martyn Hammersley′s provocative new text interrogates the complex relationship between research, policymaking and practice, against the background of the evidence-based practice movement. Addressing a series of probing questions, this book reflects on the challenge posed by the idea that social research can directly serve policymaking and practice. Key questions explored include: - Is scientific research evidence-based? - What counts as evidence for evidence-based practice? - Is social measurement possible, and is it necessary? - What are the criteria by which qualitative research should be judged? The book also discusses the case for action research, the nature of systematic reviews, proposals for interpretive reviews, and the process of qualitative synthesis. Highly readable and undeniably relevant, this book is a valuable resource for both academics and professionals involved with research.

Evidence-Based Practice: An Implementation Guide for Healthcare Organizations was created to assist the increasing number of hospitals that are attempting to implement evidence-based practice in their facilities with little or no guidance. This manual serves as a guide for the design and implementation of evidence-based practice systems and provides practice advice, worksheets, and resources for providers. It also shows institutions how to achieve Magnet status without the major investment in consultants and external resources.

Evidence synthesis is the evaluation or analysis of research evidence and opinion on a specific topic to aid in decision-making in health care. Although the science of evidence synthesis has developed most rapidly in relation to the meta-analysis of numerical data linked to theories of cause and effect, the further development of theoretical understandings and propositions of the nature of evidence, its role in health care delivery, and the facilitation of improved global health have increased rapidly since 2000. The articles appearing in this issue examine the role of evidence synthesis in nursing and health care and are written by expert translational scientists from across the world. Three introductory articles overview evidence synthesis and its role in evidence-based health care; methods, issues, and trends in the systematic review of health care evidence; and the development of a robust evidence base for nursing. Subsequent articles explore the impact of systematic reviews on policy and practice in a variety of settings, including perioperative care, pediatrics, rehabilitation and long-term/continuing care, mental health, and public health. The final articles discuss the impact of evidence on health policy and practice and the complexities of translating evidence into policy and practice. These articles show the importance of synthesizing evidence and translating policy and practice into action in our quest to improve health care and health outcomes.

Healthcare decision makers in search of reliable information that compares health interventions increasingly turn to systematic reviews for the best summary of the evidence. Systematic reviews identify, select, assess, and synthesize the findings of similar but separate studies, and can help clarify what is known and not known about the potential benefits and harms of drugs, devices, and other healthcare services. Systematic reviews can be helpful for clinicians who want to integrate research findings into their daily practices, for patients to make well-informed choices about their own care, for professional medical societies and other organizations that develop clinical practice guidelines. Too often systematic reviews are of uncertain or poor quality. There are no universally accepted standards for developing systematic reviews leading to variability in how conflicts of interest and biases are handled, how evidence is appraised, and the overall scientific rigor of the process. In Finding What Works in Health Care the Institute of Medicine (IOM) recommends 21 standards for developing high-quality systematic reviews of comparative effectiveness research. The standards address the entire systematic review process from the initial steps of formulating the topic and building the review team to producing a detailed final report that synthesizes what the evidence shows and where knowledge gaps remain. Finding What Works in Health Care also proposes a framework for improving the quality of the science underpinning systematic reviews. This book will serve as a vital resource for both sponsors and producers of systematic reviews of comparative effectiveness research.