IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v138y2015icp14-21.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Conceptualizing the use of public involvement in health policy decision-making

Author

Listed:
  • Li, Kathy K.
  • Abelson, Julia
  • Giacomini, Mita
  • Contandriopoulos, Damien

Abstract

The concept of public involvement use is not well-defined in the literature. Previous research studies have provided brief accounts of how public involvement may influence health policy, but have not detailed the internal dynamics and process through which it is actually used in the policy process. The study objective is to examine and clarify the concept and process of public involvement use in health policy decision-making. Using qualitative concept analysis methods, we reviewed the literature on the use of public involvement and conducted semi-structured interviews with key informants who have theoretical and/or practical insights on public involvement and its use in policy decision-making. Our findings are organized around interrelated questions that animate how the concept of use is understood, interpreted, and operationalized. In asking, “How is ‘use’ perceived in relation to health policy decision-making?” meanings are constructed for the concept by identifying differences and drawing connections between “use” and related terms. In asking “How would one know if public involvement was used in health policy decision-making?” our findings weigh in on the act of listening as a precursor to use, the ways in which use is mediated, and responses to the input obtained from public involvement processes as signals of use. These findings are a first step toward improving conceptual clarity about what public involvement use means, how it is understood and interpreted by relevant actors in the public involvement and public policy fields, and how it might be operationalized. We expect our findings to be particularly useful for public involvement practitioners who are often confronted with questions from public involvement participants regarding how their input will be used in health policy decision-making.

Suggested Citation

  • Li, Kathy K. & Abelson, Julia & Giacomini, Mita & Contandriopoulos, Damien, 2015. "Conceptualizing the use of public involvement in health policy decision-making," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 14-21.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:138:y:2015:i:c:p:14-21
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.05.023
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953615003056
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.05.023?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. Tenbensel, Tim, 2002. "Interpreting public input into priority-setting: the role of mediating institutions," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 173-194, November.
    2. Marsha Gold, "undated". "Pathways to the Use of Health Services Research in Policy," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 7cb201fc1afe4ec9b2c1e7384, Mathematica Policy Research.
    3. Abelson, Julia & Giacomini, Mita & Lehoux, Pascale & Gauvin, Francois-Pierre, 2007. "Bringing `the public' into health technology assessment and coverage policy decisions: From principles to practice," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 37-50, June.
    4. repec:mpr:mprres:6334 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Wiseman, V. & Mooney, G. & Berry, G. & Tang, K. C., 2003. "Involving the general public in priority setting: experiences from Australia," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 56(5), pages 1001-1012, March.
    6. David H. Greenberg & Marvin B. Mandell, 1991. "Research utilization in policymaking: A tale of two series (of social experiments)," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(4), pages 633-656.
    7. Landry, Rejean & Amara, Nabil & Lamari, Moktar, 2001. "Utilization of social science research knowledge in Canada," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 333-349, February.
    8. Thurston, Wilfreda E. & MacKean, Gail & Vollman, Ardene & Casebeer, Ann & Weber, Myron & Maloff, Bretta & Bader, Judy, 2005. "Public participation in regional health policy: a theoretical framework," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(3), pages 237-252, September.
    9. Andrew Dobson, 2012. "Listening: The New Democratic Deficit," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 60(4), pages 843-859, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Colin Williams & Liping Fang, 2019. "A Value-Focused Multiple Participant-Multiple Criteria (MPMC) Decision Support Approach for Public Policy Formulation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 99-126, February.
    2. Degeling, Chris & Rychetnik, Lucie & Street, Jackie & Thomas, Rae & Carter, Stacy M., 2017. "Influencing health policy through public deliberation: Lessons learned from two decades of Citizens'/community juries," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 166-171.

    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. Thurston, Wilfreda E. & MacKean, Gail & Vollman, Ardene & Casebeer, Ann & Weber, Myron & Maloff, Bretta & Bader, Judy, 2005. "Public participation in regional health policy: a theoretical framework," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(3), pages 237-252, September.
    2. Elberse, Janneke Elisabeth & Pittens, Carina Anna Cornelia Maria & de Cock Buning, Tjard & Broerse, Jacqueline Elisabeth Willy, 2012. "Patient involvement in a scientific advisory process: Setting the research agenda for medical products," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(2), pages 231-242.
    3. Jabbar, Amina M. & Abelson, Julia, 2011. "Development of a framework for effective community engagement in Ontario, Canada," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(1), pages 59-69, June.
    4. Grant, Peter R., 1997. "The relocation of nursing home residents: An illustration of the advantages gained by planning a new program and designing an implementation evaluation together," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 507-516, November.
    5. Blackstock, K.L. & Kelly, G.J. & Horsey, B.L., 2007. "Developing and applying a framework to evaluate participatory research for sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 726-742, February.
    6. Estabrooks, Carole A. & Norton, Peter & Birdsell, Judy M. & Newton, Mandi S. & Adewale, Adeniyi J. & Thornley, Richard, 2008. "Knowledge translation and research careers: Mode I and Mode II activity among health researchers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6-7), pages 1066-1078, July.
    7. Ouimet, Mathieu & Landry, Réjean & Amara, Nabil & Belkhodja, Omar, 2006. "What factors induce health care decision-makers to use clinical guidelines? Evidence from provincial health ministries, regional health authorities and hospitals in Canada," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(4), pages 964-976, February.
    8. Temilade Sesan & Willie Siyanbola, 2021. "“These are the realities”: insights from facilitating researcher-policymaker engagement in Nigeria’s household energy sector," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-11, December.
    9. Currie, Melissa & King, Gillian & Rosenbaum, Peter & Law, Mary & Kertoy, Marilyn & Specht, Jacqueline, 2005. "A model of impacts of research partnerships in health and social services," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 400-412, November.
    10. Artur A Steinerowski & Izabella Steinerowska-Streb, 2012. "Can social enterprise contribute to creating sustainable rural communities? Using the lens of structuration theory to analyse the emergence of rural social enterprise," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 27(2), pages 167-182, March.
    11. Mauro Serapioni & Pedro Lopes Ferreira & Patrícia Antunes, 2014. "Participação em Saúde: Conceitos e Conteúdos," Notas Económicas, Faculty of Economics, University of Coimbra, issue 40, pages 26-42, December.
    12. Howlett, Michael & Migone, Andrea Riccardo, 2010. "The Canadian biotechnology regulatory regime: The role of participation," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 280-287.
    13. Mathieu Ouimet & Nabil Amara & Réjean Landry & John Lavis, 2007. "Direct interactions medical school faculty members have with professionals and managers working in public and private sector organizations: A cross-sectional study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 72(2), pages 307-323, August.
    14. Evans, Sarah & Scarbrough, Harry, 2014. "Supporting knowledge translation through collaborative translational research initiatives: ‘Bridging’ versus ‘blurring’ boundary-spanning approaches in the UK CLAHRC initiative," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 119-127.
    15. Réjean Landry & Nabil Amara & Mathieu Ouimet, 2007. "Determinants of knowledge transfer: evidence from Canadian university researchers in natural sciences and engineering," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 32(6), pages 561-592, December.
    16. Strzałkowski, Andrzej, 2024. "Adaptation and operationalisation of sustainable degrowth for policy: Why we need to translate research papers into legislative drafts?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    17. Josie Messina & David Grainger, 2012. "A Pilot Study to Identify Areas for Further Improvements in Patient and Public Involvement in Health Technology Assessments for Medicines," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 5(3), pages 199-211, September.
    18. Kerry A Waylen & Juliette Young, 2014. "Expectations and Experiences of Diverse Forms of Knowledge Use: The Case of the UK National Ecosystem Assessment," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 32(2), pages 229-246, April.
    19. Jonathan Jae-an Crisman, 2022. "Co-Creation From the Grassroots: Listening to Arts-Based Community Organizing in Little Tokyo," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(3), pages 340-350.
    20. Bombard, Yvonne & Abelson, Julia & Simeonov, Dorina & Gauvin, Francois-Pierre, 2011. "Eliciting ethical and social values in health technology assessment: A participatory approach," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 135-144, July.

    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:socmed:v:138:y:2015:i:c:p:14-21. 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/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    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.