IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v91y2022ics0149718922000076.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A comprehensive monitoring and evaluation framework for evidence to policy networks

Author

Listed:
  • Kuchenmüller, Tanja
  • Chapman, Evelina
  • Takahashi, Ryoko
  • Lester, Louise
  • Reinap, Marge
  • Ellen, Moriah
  • Haby, Michelle M.

Abstract

To describe the development of a framework for monitoring and evaluating knowledge translation (KT) networks.

Suggested Citation

  • Kuchenmüller, Tanja & Chapman, Evelina & Takahashi, Ryoko & Lester, Louise & Reinap, Marge & Ellen, Moriah & Haby, Michelle M., 2022. "A comprehensive monitoring and evaluation framework for evidence to policy networks," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:91:y:2022:i:c:s0149718922000076
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2022.102053
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718922000076
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2022.102053?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Xavier Bosch-Capblanch & John N Lavis & Simon Lewin & Rifat Atun & John-Arne Røttingen & Daniel Dröschel & Lise Beck & Edgardo Abalos & Fadi El-Jardali & Lucy Gilson & Sandy Oliver & Kaspar Wyss & Pet, 2012. "Guidance for Evidence-Informed Policies about Health Systems: Rationale for and Challenges of Guidance Development," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(3), pages 1-8, March.
    2. van de Goor, Ien & Hämäläinen, Riitta-Maija & Syed, Ahmed & Juel Lau, Cathrine & Sandu, Petru & Spitters, Hilde & Eklund Karlsson, Leena & Dulf, Diana & Valente, Adriana & Castellani, Tommaso & Aro, A, 2017. "Determinants of evidence use in public health policy making: Results from a study across six EU countries," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(3), pages 273-281.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Diana Arnautu & Christian Dagenais, 2021. "Use and effectiveness of policy briefs as a knowledge transfer tool: a scoping review," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-14, December.
    2. Caixia Wang & Huijie Li, 2022. "Public Compliance Matters in Evidence-Based Public Health Policy: Evidence from Evaluating Social Distancing in the First Wave of COVID-19," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-13, March.
    3. Béné, Christophe, 2022. "Why the Great Food Transformation may not happen – A deep-dive into our food systems’ political economy, controversies and politics of evidence," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    4. Jamie Bryant & Natasha Noble & Rob Sanson-Fisher & Andrew Searles & Christopher Oldmeadow & Rochelle Watson & Elise Mansfield, 2018. "Where should we target our research effort? A data-based model for determining priorities for smoking cessation research and healthcare delivery in general practice," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 2(2), pages 31-39, September.
    5. Chan, Olivia S.K. & Lam, Wendy & Zhao, Shilin & Tun, Hein & Liu, Ping & Wu, Peng, 2024. "Why prescribe antibiotics? A systematic review of knowledge, tension, and motivation among clinicians in low-, middle- and high-income countries," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 345(C).
    6. Ayat Ahmadi & Bahareh Yazdizadeh & Leila Doshmangir & Reza Majdzadeh & Shabnam Asghari, 2022. "PROTOCOL: Systematic review of methods to reduce risk of bias in knowledge translation interventional studies in health‐related issues," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(2), June.
    7. Belinda J Burford & Vivian Welch & Elizabeth Waters & Peter Tugwell & David Moher & Jennifer O’Neill & Tracey Koehlmoos & Mark Petticrew, 2013. "Testing the PRISMA-Equity 2012 Reporting Guideline: the Perspectives of Systematic Review Authors," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(10), pages 1-1, October.
    8. Antoine Noël Racine & Jean-Marie Garbarino & Bernard Massiera & Anne Vuillemin, 2022. "Modeling the Development of Local Health-Enhancing Physical Activity Policies from Empirical Data and Policy Science Theories," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-12, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:91:y:2022:i:c:s0149718922000076. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.