Skip to main content
SearchLoginLogin or Signup


Published onApr 25, 2024

  1. Graham ID, Logan J, Harrison MB, Straus SE, Tetroe J, Caswell W, et al. Lost in knowledge translation: time for a map? J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2006;26(1):13– 24.

  2. Resolution WHA71.1. WHO’s Thirteenth General Programme of Work (GPW13). Approved by the Seventy-first World Health Assembly, 21–26 May 2018. WHO/PRP/18.1. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2019.

  3. Clark R, Haby M. Chapter 7. Evidence-based policy: why and how. In: Carey G, Landvogt K, Barraket J, editors. Creating and implementing public policy: cross-sectoral debates. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge; 2015:98–112.

  4. Partridge ACR, Mansilla C, Randhawa H, Lavis JN, El-Jardali F, Sewankambo NK. Lessons learned from descriptions and evaluations of knowledge translation platforms supporting evidence-informed policy-making in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review. Health Res Policy Syst. 2020;18(1):127. Epub 2020/11/02.

  5. Rehfuess EA, Stratil JM, Scheel IB, Portela A, Norris SL, Baltussen R. The WHO-INTEGRATE evidence to decision framework version 1.0: integrating WHO norms and values and a complexity perspective. BMJ Glob Health. 2019;4(Suppl 1):e000844. Epub 2019/02/19.

  6. Stewart R, Dayal H, Langer L, van Rooyen C. The evidence ecosystem in South Africa: growing resilience and institutionalisation of evidence use. Palgrave Commun. 2019;5(1):90.

  7. Banta D. The development of health technology assessment. Health Policy. 2003;63:121–32.

  8. Guyatt G, Cairns J, Churchill D, Cook D, Haynes B, Hirsh J, et al. Evidence-based medicine: a new approach to teaching the practice of medicine. JAMA. 1992;268(17):2420–5.

  9. Halstead SB, Tugwell P, Bennett K. The International Clinical Epidemiology Network (INCLEN): a progress report. J Clin Epidemiol. 1991;44(6):579–89. Epub 1991/01/01.

  10. Béland D, Ridde V. Ideas and policy implementation: understanding the resistance against free health care in Africa. Global Health Governance. 2016;10(3):9–23.

  11. John P. Theories of policy change and variation reconsidered: a prospectus for the political economy of public policy. Pol Sci. 2018;51(1):1–16.

  12. Parkhurst JO. The politics of evidence: from evidence-based policy to the good governance of evidence. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge; 2017.

  13. Resolution WHA 58.34. Ministerial Summit on Health Research. Fifty-eight World Health Assembly, 16-25 May 2005. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2005.

  14. Wilson P, Sheldon TA. Using evidence in health and healthcare. In: Boaz A, Davies H, Fraser A, Nutley S, editors. What works now? Evidence informed policy and practice. Bristol: Policy Press; 2019.

  15. Langlois EV, Becerril Montekio V, Young T, Song K, Alcalde-Rabanal J, Tran N. Enhancing evidence informed policymaking in complex health systems: lessons from multi-site collaborative approaches. Health Res Policy Syst. 2016;14(1):20.

  16. Brownson RC, Fielding JE, Maylahn CM. Evidence- based public health: a fundamental concept for public health practice. Annu Rev Public Health. 2009;30:175–201. Epub 2009/03/20.

  17. Chalmers I, Bracken MB, Djulbegovic B, Garattini S, Grant J, Gulmezoglu AM, et al. How to increase value and reduce waste when research priorities are set. Lancet. 2014;383(9912):156–65. Epub 2014/01/15.

  18. Oliver K, Pearce W. Three lessons from evidence- based medicine and policy: increase transparency, balance inputs and understand power. Palgrave Commun. 2017;3(1):43.

  19. Lomas J, Culyer T, McCutcheon C, McAuley L, Law S. Conceptualizing and combining evidence for health system guidance. Ottawa, Ontario: Canadian Health Services Research Foundation; 2005.

  20. Oxman AD, Lavis JN, Lewin S, Fretheim A. SUPPORT tools for evidence-informed health policymaking (STP) 1: what is evidence-informed policymaking? Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7 Suppl 1:S1.

  21. Sharma T, Choudhury M, Kaur B, Naidoo B, Garner S, Littlejohns P, et al. Evidence informed decision making: the use of “colloquial evidence” at NICE. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2015;31(3):138–46. Epub 2015/05/21.

  22. Kothari A, Rudman D, Dobbins M, Rouse M, Sibbald S, Edwards N. The use of tacit and explicit knowledge in public health: a qualitative study. Implement Sci. 2012;7:20. Epub 2012/03/22.

  23. EVIPNet Europe. Conceptual background and case studies – introduction to EVIPNet Europe. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2017.

  24. Kislov R, Wilson P, Cummings G, Ehrenberg A, Gifford W, Kelly J, et al. From research evidence to “evidence by proxy”? Organizational enactment of evidence- based health care in four high-income countries. Public Adm Rev. 2019;79(5):684–98.

  25. EVIPNet Europe. Evidence briefs for policy. Using the integrated knowledge translation approach: a guiding manual. Copenhagen: World Health Organisation Regional Office for Europe; 2020.

  26. Oxman AD, Schunemann HJ, Fretheim A. Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 7. Deciding what evidence to include. Health Res Policy Syst. 2006;4:19. Epub 2006/12/05.

  27. Burford B, Lewin S, Welch V, Rehfuess E, Waters E. Assessing the applicability of findings in systematic reviews of complex interventions can enhance the utility of reviews for decision making. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66(11):1251–61. Epub 2013/08/21.

  28. Lewin S, Oxman AD, Lavis JN, Fretheim A, Marti SG, Munabi-Babigumira S. SUPPORT tools for evidence- informed policymaking in health 11: finding and using evidence about local conditions. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7(1):S11.

  29. Nutley S, Powell A, Davies H. What counts as good evidence? Provocation paper for the Alliance for Useful Evidence. London: Alliance for Useful Evidence; 2013.

  30. Murad MH, Asi N, Alsawas M, Alahdab F. New evidence pyramid. Evid Based Med. 2016;21(4):125–7. Epub 2016/06/25.

  31. Petticrew M, Roberts H. Evidence, hierarchies, and typologies: horses for courses. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2003;57(7):527–9. Epub 2003/06/25.

  32. Cookson R. Evidence-based policy making in health care: what it is and what it isn’t. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2005;10(2):118–21. Epub 2005/04/16.

  33. Parkhurst JO, Abeysinghe S. What constitutes “good” evidence for public health and social policy- making? From hierarchies to appropriateness. Social Epistemology. 2016;30(5–6):665-79.

  34. Petticrew M. Time to rethink the systematic review catechism? Moving from ‘what works’ to ‘what happens’. Syst Rev. 2015;4:36. Epub 2015/04/16.

  35. Alonso-Coello P, Schunemann HJ, Moberg J, Brignardello-Petersen R, Akl EA, Davoli M, et al. GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks: a systematic and transparent approach to making well informed healthcare choices. 1: Introduction. BMJ. 2016;353:i2016. Epub 2016/06/30.

  36. Porta M, Greenland S, Hernán M, Silva IdS, Last JM, for the International Epidemiological Association, editors. A dictionary of epidemiology. Sixth edition. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2014.

  37. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist G, Kunz R, Brozek J, Alonso-Coello P, et al. GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence–study limitations (risk of bias). J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(4):407–15. Epub 2011/01/21.

  38. Balshem H, Helfand M, Schunemann HJ, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Brozek J, et al. GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(4):401–6. Epub 2011/01/07.

  39. WHO handbook for guideline development, second edition. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2014.

  40. Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, et al., editors. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions, version 6.2 (updated February 2021). Cochrane; 2021 (, accessed 20 November 2021).

  41. Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Sultan S, Brozek J, Glasziou P, Alonso-Coello P, et al. GRADE guidelines: 11. Making an overall rating of confidence in effect estimates for a single outcome and for all outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66(2):151–7. Epub 2012/05/01.

  42. Lewin S, Booth A, Glenton C, Munthe-Kaas H, Rashidian A, Wainwright M, et al. Applying GRADE-CERQual to qualitative evidence synthesis findings: introduction to the series. Implement Sci. 2018;13(Suppl 1):2. Epub 2018/02/01.

  43. Doemeland D, Trevino J. Which World Bank reports are widely read? Policy Research Working Paper; No. 6851. License: CC BY 3.0 IGO. Washington, D.C.: World Bank; 2014.

  44. Best A, Holmes B. Systems thinking, knowledge and action: towards better models and methods. Evidence & Policy. 2010;6(2):145–59.

  45. Martin K, Mullan Z, Horton R. Overcoming the research to policy gap. Lancet Glob Health. 2019;7 Suppl 1:S1–S2. Epub 2019/03/13.

  46. van den Driessen Mareeuw F, Vaandrager L, Klerkx L, Naaldenberg J, Koelen M. Beyond bridging the know-do gap: a qualitative study of systemic interaction to foster knowledge exchange in the public health sector in The Netherlands. BMC Public Health. 2015;15:922. Epub 2015/09/21.

  47. Innvaer S, Vist G, Trommald M, Oxman A. Health policy-makers’ perceptions of their use of evidence: a systematic review. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2002;7(4):239–44.

  48. Oliver K, Innvar S, Lorenc T, Woodman J, Thomas J. A systematic review of barriers to and facilitators of the use of evidence by policymakers. BMC Health Serv Res. 2014;14:2.

  49. Ellen ME, Lavis JN, Sharon A, Shemer J. Health systems and policy research evidence in health policy making in Israel: what are researchers’ practices in transferring knowledge to policy makers? Health Res Policy Syst. 2014;12:67.

  50. Oliver K, Cairney P. The dos and don’ts of influencing policy: a systematic review of advice to academics. Palgrave Commun. 2019;5(1):21.

  51. Green LW. Public health asks of systems science: to advance our evidence-based practice, can you help us get more practice-based evidence? Am J Public Health. 2006;96(3):406–9. Epub 2006/02/02.

  52. OECD. Building capacity for evidence-informed policy-making: lessons from country experiences. Paris: OECD Publishing; 2020.

  53. World report on knowledge for better health: strengthening health systems. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2004.

  54. Weiss CH. The many meanings of research utilization. Public Adm Rev. 1979;39(5):426–31.

  55. Bailey T, Mouton J. The production and utilisation of knowledge in higher education institutions in South Africa (Volume 1): a review of models of research utilisation. Stellenbosch: SUN PReSS, a division of AFRICAN SUN MeDIA, Centre for Research on Science & Technology, Stellenbosch University; 2005 ( research_utilisation, accessed 19 November 2021).

  56. Estabrooks CA. The conceptual structure of research utilization. Res Nurs Health. 1999;22(3):203–16. Epub 1999/05/27.

  57. Lavis JN, Lomas J, Hamid M, Sewankambo NK. Assessing country-level efforts to link research to action. Bull World Health Organ. 2006;84(8):620–8.

  58. Thirteenth General Programme of Work 2019–2023. WHO results framework. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2019.

  59. Thirteenth General Programme of Work (GPW13): methods for impact measurement. Licence: CC BY- NC-SA 3.0 IGO. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2020.

  60. McCormack L, Sheridan S, Lewis M, Boudewyns V, Melvin CL, Kistler C, et al. Communication and dissemination strategies to facilitate the use of health-related evidence. Evidence report/technology assessment. 2013(213):1–520.

  61. Hajeebhoy N, Rigsby A, McColl A, Sanghvi T, Abrha TH, Godana A, et al. Change strategies to protect, promote, and support infant and young child feeding. Food Nutr Bull. 2013;34(3 Suppl):S181–94. Epub 2013/11/23.

  62. Inter-Agency Standing Committee. The Grand Bargain: a shared commitment to better serve people in need. Istanbul, Turkey: IASC; 2016 (https://, accessed 20 November 2021).

  63. Straus SE, Tetroe J, Graham ID, editors. Knowledge translation in health care: moving from evidence to practice. second edition. West Sussex, UK: John Wiley & Sons; 2013.

  64. Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Knowledge translation in health care: moving from evidence to practice. 2018 (, accessed 20 November 2021).

  65. Lavis JN, Gauvin FP, Mattison CA, Moat KA, Waddell K, Wilson MG, et al. Rapid synthesis: creating rapid- learning health systems in Canada. 10 December 2018. Hamilton, Canada: McMaster Health Forum; 2018.

  66. El-Jardali F, Fadlallah R, Lavis J. A 2-day meeting to advance the field of and innovation in knowledge translation to achieve impact. Evidence-informed Policy Network (EVIPNet); 2018.

  67. McMaster Health Forum. Global Commission on Evidence to address Societal Challenges. Hamilton, ON: McMaster University; 2021 (https:// commission, accessed 1 December 2021).

  68. WHO public health goods. Technical products on norms/standards, data and research. Guide in alignment with PB22-23. April 2021 (https://, accessed 10 November 2021).

  69. WHO Regional Office for the Eastern Mediterranean. Developing national institutional capacity for evidence-informed policy-making for health [EM/ RC66/R.5]. Cairo: WHO Regional Office for the Eastern Mediterranean; 2019.

  70. Velasco Garrido M, Gerhardus A, Rottingen JA, Busse R. Developing health technology assessment to address health care system needs. Health Policy. 2010;94(3):196–202. Epub 2009/11/06.

  71. Lavis JN, Panisset U. EVIPNet Africa’s first series of policy briefs to support evidence-informed policymaking. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2010;26(2):229–32.

  72. Reveiz L. “Monitoreo de las metas del ODS-3 y sus desigualdades: evidencia para la accion del ODS-3.” Presentation, SDGs Portal Launch: Evidence and Intelligence for Actions as it relates to Objectives of SDGs 3, Pan American, Health Organization: Washington, D.C.; September 2, 2020.

  73. Langlois ÉV, Daniels K, Akl EA, editors. Evidence synthesis for health policy and systems: a methods guide. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2018.

  74. Gough D, Thomas J, Oliver S. Clarifying differences between review designs and methods. Syst Rev. 2012;1:28. Epub 2012/06/12.

  75. Gough D, Thomas J, Oliver S. Clarifying differences between reviews within evidence ecosystems. Syst Rev. 2019;8(1):170. Epub 2019/07/17.

  76. Tricco AC, Zarin W, Ghassemi M, Nincic V, Lillie E, Page MJ, et al. Same family, different species: methodological conduct and quality varies according to purpose for five types of knowledge synthesis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018;96:133–42. Epub 2017/11/07.

  77. EASP/PAHO/LSE. Health technology assessment toolbox for emerging settings. Best practices and recommendations. Granada: Escuela Andaluza de Salud Pública / Organización Panamericana de la Salud / London School of Economics; 2015 (http://, accessed 17 June 2021).

  78. Kristensen FB, Sigmund H, editors. Health technology assessment handbook, second edition. Copenhagen: Danish Centre for Health Technology Assessment, National Board of Health; 2007.

  79. Schunemann HJ, Wiercioch W, Etxeandia I, Falavigna M, Santesso N, Mustafa R, et al. Guidelines 2.0: systematic development of a comprehensive checklist for a successful guideline enterprise. CMAJ. 2014;186(3):E123–42. Epub 2013/12/18.

  80. Health technology assessment of medical devices. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2011 (https://, accessed 6 October 2021)

  81. An introduction to patient decision aids. Br Med J. 2013;347:f4147.

  82. Benoit F. Public policy models and their usefulness in public health: the stages model. Montréal, Québec: National Collaborating Centre for Healthy Public Policy; 2013 ( Publications.ccnpps?id_article=966, accessed 10 November 2021).

  83. Lavis JN, Wilson MG, Oxman AD, Lewin S, Fretheim: SUPPORT tools for evidence-informed health policymaking (STP) 4: using research evidence to clarify a problem. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7(1):S4.

  84. Oliver S, Roche C, Stewart R, Bangpan M, Dickson K, Pells K, et al. Stakeholder engagement for development impact evaluation and evidence synthesis. CEDIL Inception Paper 3. London: The Centre of Excellence for Development Impact and Learning (CEDIL); 2018.

  85. Schünemann HJ, Fretheim A, Oxman AD. Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 13. Applicability, transferability and adaptation. Health Res Policy Syst. 2006;4(1):25.

  86. Strengthening national evidence-informed guideline programs. A tool for adapting and implementing guidelines in the Americas. Washington, D.C.: Pan American Health Organization; 2018.

  87. Schünemann HJ, Wiercioch W, Brozek J, Etxeandia- Ikobaltzeta I, Mustafa RA, Manja V, et al. GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks for adoption, adaptation, and de novo development of trustworthy recommendations: GRADE-ADOLOPMENT. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;81:101–10.

  88. ADAPTE collaboration. The ADAPTE process: resource toolkit for guideline adaptation. Version 2.0: Guideline International Network; 2009 ( Resource-toolkit-V2.1-March-2010-updated- disclaimer.pdf, accessed 10 November 2021).

  89. Chase D, Rosten C, Turner S, Hicks N, Milne R. Development of a toolkit and glossary to aid in the adaptation of health technology assessment (HTA) reports for use in different contexts. Health Technol Assess. 2009;13(59):1–142, iii. Epub 2009/12/05.

  90. Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G, Thuku M, Hamel C, Moran J, et al. AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non- randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ. 2017;358:j4008. Epub 2017/09/25.

  91. Lavis JN, Oxman AD, Souza NM, Lewin S, Gruen RL, Fretheim A. SUPPORT tools for evidence-informed health policymaking (STP) 9: assessing the applicability of the findings of a systematic review. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7(1):S9.

  92. Munthe-Kaas H, Nokleby H, Lewin S, Glenton C. The TRANSFER Approach for assessing the transferability of systematic review findings. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020;20(1):11. Epub 2020/01/19.

  93. King VJ, Garrity C, Stevens A, Nussbaumer-Streit B, Hartling L, Harrod CS, et al. Performing rapid reviews. In: Tricco AC, Langlois EV, Straus S, editors. Rapid reviews to strengthen health policy and systems: a practical guide. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2017:21–34.

  94. Haby MM, Chapman E, Clark R, Barreto J, Reveiz L, Lavis JN. Designing a rapid response program to support evidence-informed decision making in the Americas Region: using the best available evidence and case studies. Implementation Science. 2016;11:117.

  95. Akl EA, Haddaway NR, Rada G, Lotfi T. Future of Evidence Ecosystem Series: evidence synthesis 2.0: when systematic, scoping, rapid, living, and overviews of reviews come together. J Clin Epidemiol. 2020;123:162–5.

  96. Elliott JH, Turner T, Clavisi O, Thomas J, Higgins JP, Mavergames C, et al. Living systematic reviews: an emerging opportunity to narrow the evidence-practice gap. PLoS Med. 2014;11(2):e1001603. Epub 2014/02/22.

  97. Fretheim A, Munabi-Babigumira S, Oxman AD, Lavis JN, Lewin S. SUPPORT tools for evidence-informed policymaking in health 6: using research evidence to address how an option will be implemented. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7(1):S6.

  98. Simmons R, Fajans P, Ghiron L. Beginning with the end in mind: planning pilot projects and other programmatic research for successful scaling up. Geneva: World Health Organization, ExpandNet; 2011.

  99. Langer L, Tripney J, Gough D. The science of using science: researching the use of research evidence in decision-making. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, UCL Institute of Education, University College London; 2016.

  100. Lavis JN, Robertson D, Woodside JM, McLeod CB, Abelson J. How can research organizations more effectively transfer research knowledge to decision makers? Milbank Q. 2003;81(2):221–48.

  101. Report on International Forum on Evidence Informed Health Policy in Low-and Middle-Income Countries. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 27–31 August, 2012. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2013 (https://www.who. int/evidence/Addisreport2012.pdf, accessed 20 November 2021).

  102. Oxman AD, Lewin S, Lavis JN, Fretheim A. SUPPORT tools for evidence-informed health policymaking (STP) 15: engaging the public in evidence-informed policymaking. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7(1):S15.

  103. Eklund Karlsson L, Takahashi R. A resource for developing an evidence synthesis report for policy- making. Health Evidence Network (HEN) synthesis report 50. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2017.

  104. EVIPNet Europe. Policy dialogue preparation and facilitation checklist. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2016.

  105. Lavis JN, Boyko JA, Oxman AD, Lewin S, Fretheim: SUPPORT tools for evidence-informed health policymaking (STP) 14: organising and using policy dialogues to support evidence-informed policymaking. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7 Suppl 1:S14.

  106. Gauvin FP. Citizen Panels program. Hamilton, Canada: McMaster Health Forum; 2017 (https://, accessed 20 November 2021).

  107. Simmons R, Ghiron L, Fajans P. Nine steps for developing a scaling-up strategy. Geneva: World Health Organization, ExpandNet; 2010.

  108. Rabin BA, Brownson RC, Haire-Joshu D, Kreuter MW, Weaver NL. A glossary for dissemination and implementation research in health. J Public Health Manag Pract. 2008;14(2):117–23. Epub 2008/02/22.

  109. Shediac-Rizkallah MC, Bone LR. Planning for the sustainability of community-based health programs: conceptual frameworks and future directions for research, practice and policy. Health Educ Res. 1998;13(1):87–108. Epub 1998/02/06.

  110. Glasgow RE, Harden SM, Gaglio B, Rabin B, Smith ML, Porter GC, et al. RE-AIM Planning and Evaluation Framework: adapting to new science and practice with a 20-year review. Frontiers in Public Health. 2019;7(64).

  111. Stirman SW, Kimberly J, Cook N, Calloway A, Castro F, Charns M. The sustainability of new programs and innovations: a review of the empirical literature and recommendations for future research. Implement Sci. 2012;7(1):17.

  112. Chambers DA, Glasgow RE, Stange KC. The dynamic sustainability framework: addressing the paradox of sustainment amid ongoing change. Implement Sci. 2013;8(1):117.

  113. Sheikh K, Abimbola S, editors. Learning health systems: pathways to progress. Flagship report of the Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2021.

  114. Boes S, Mantwill S, Kaufmann C, Brach M, Bickenbach J, Rubinelli S, et al. Swiss Learning Health System: a national initiative to establish learning cycles for continuous health system improvement. Learn Health Syst. 2018;2(3):e10059. Epub 2019/06/28.

  115. Whitehead M. The concepts and principles of equity and health. Int J Health Serv. 1992;22(3):429–45. Epub 1992/01/01.

  116. O’Neill J, Tabish H, Welch V, Petticrew M, Pottie K, Clarke M, et al. Applying an equity lens to interventions: using PROGRESS ensures consideration of socially stratifying factors to illuminate inequities in health. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67(1):56–64.

  117. Tugwell P, Petticrew M, Kristjansson E, Welch V, Ueffing E, Waters E, et al. Assessing equity in systematic reviews: realising the recommendations

    of the Commission on Social Determinants of Health. BMJ. 2010;341:c4739. Epub 2010/09/15.

  118. Welch VA, Petticrew M, O’Neill J, Waters E, Armstrong R, Bhutta ZA, et al. Health equity: evidence synthesis and knowledge translation methods. Syst Rev. 2013;2:43. Epub 2013/06/27.

  119. Ueffing E, Tugwell P, Hatcher Roberts J, Walker P, Hamel N, Welch V. Equity-oriented toolkit for health technology assessment and knowledge translation: application to scaling up of training and education for health workers. Hum Resour Health. 2009;7:67. Epub 2009/08/07.

  120. Dobbins M, Hanna SE, Ciliska D, Manske S, Cameron R, Mercer SL, et al. A randomized controlled trial evaluating the impact of knowledge translation and exchange strategies. Implement Sci. 2009;4:61.

  121. Rushmer R, Ward V, Kuchenmüller T. Chapter 7. Knowledge translation: key concepts, terms and activities. In: Verschuuren M, van Oers H, editors. Population health monitoring: climbing the information pyramid: Springer Nature; 2019:127–50.

  122. Court J, Cotterrell L. What political and institutional context issues matter for bridging research and policy? A literature review and discussion of data collection approaches. Working paper 269 London, UK: Overseas Development Institute; 2006 (https://odi. org/en/publications/what-political-and-institutional- context-issues-matter-for-bridging-research-and- policy-a-literature-review-and-discussion-of-data- collection-approaches/, accessed 20 November 2021).

  123. Rogers L, De Brún A, McAuliffe E. Defining and assessing context in healthcare implementation studies: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2020;20(1):591.

  124. Weyrauch V, Echt L, Suliman S. Knowledge into policy: going beyond ‘context matters’: INASP; 2016 ( policy-going-beyond-context-matters, accessed 10 November 2021).

  125. OECD and European Commission Joint Research Centre (JRC). Building capacity for evidence informed policy making: towards a baseline skills set. Paris: OECD Publishing; 2018.

  126. Joint Research Centre. Skills for evidence-informed policy making: continuous professional development framework: European Commission; 2017.

  127. Haynes A, Rowbotham SJ, Redman S, Brennan S, Williamson A, Moore G. What can we learn from interventions that aim to increase policy-makers’ capacity to use research? A realist scoping review. Health Res Policy Syst. 2018;16(1):31.

  128. Peirson L, Ciliska D, Dobbins M, Mowat D. Building capacity for evidence informed decision making in public health: a case study of organizational change. BMC Public Health. 2012;12(1):137.

  129. Thornhill J, Judd M, Clements D. CHSRF knowledge transfer: (re)introducing the self-assessment tool that is helping decision-makers assess their organization’s capacity to use research. Healthc Q. 2009;12(1):22–4. Epub 2009/01/15.

  130. Green A, Bennett S, editors. Sound choices: enhancing capacity for evidence-informed health policy. Geneva, Switzerland: Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research, World Health Organization; 2007.

  131. Cairney P, Kwiatkowski R. How to communicate effectively with policymakers: combine insights from psychology and policy studies. Palgrave Commun. 2017;3(1):37.

  132. Thirteenth General Programme of Work 2019–2023. Promote health, keep the world safe, serve the vulnerable. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2019 ( handle/10665/324775/WHO-PRP-18.1-eng.pdf, accessed 1 December 2021).

  133. Constitution of the World Health Organization. Basic Documents, forty-fifth edition, Supplement. October 2006. ( constitution_en.pdf, accessed 1 December 2021).

  134. Sale JEM, Lohfeld LH, Brazil K. Revisiting the quantitative-qualitative debate: implications for mixed-methods research. Qual Quant. 2002;36(1):43–53.

  135. Boström A-M, Sommerfeld DK, Stenhols AW, Kiessling A. Capability beliefs on, and use of evidence-based practice among four health professional and student groups in geriatric care: a cross sectional study. PLoS One. 2018;13(2):e0192017.

  136. Stevens H. Evidence based medicine from a social science perspective. Aust J Gen Pract. 2018;47:889– 92.

  137. De Savigny D, Adam T, editors. Systems thinking for health systems strengthening. Geneva: Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research, WHO; 2009.

  138. Welch V, Petticrew M, Tugwell P, Moher D, O’Neill J, Waters E, et al. PRISMA-Equity 2012 extension: reporting guidelines for systematic reviews with a focus on health equity. PLoS Med. 2012;9(10):e1001333.

  139. Welch VA, Norheim OF, Jull J, Cookson R, Sommerfelt H, Tugwell P. CONSORT-Equity 2017 extension and elaboration for better reporting of health equity in randomised trials. BMJ. 2017;359:j5085.

  140. Oxman AD, Lavis JN, Lewin S, Fretheim A. SUPPORT tools for evidence-informed health policymaking (STP) 10: taking equity into consideration when assessing the findings of a systematic review. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7(1):S10.

  141. Moberg J, Oxman AD, Rosenbaum S, Schunemann HJ, Guyatt G, Flottorp S, et al. The GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) framework for health system and public health decisions. Health Res Policy Syst. 2018;16(1):45. Epub 2018/05/31.

  142. Fielding JE, Briss PA. Promoting evidence-based public health policy: can we have better evidence and more action? Health Aff (Millwood). 2006;25(4):969– 78.

  143. Macintyre S. Evidence based policy making: impact on health inequalities still needs to be assessed. BMJ. 2003;326(7379):5–6. Epub 2003/01/04.

  144. Oxman AD, Lavis JN, Fretheim A, Lewin S. SUPPORT tools for evidence-informed health policymaking (STP) 17: dealing with insufficient research evidence. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7(1):S17.

  145. Haby MM, Chapman E, Clark R, Barreto J, Reveiz L, Lavis JN. What are the best methodologies for rapid reviews of the research evidence for evidence- informed decision making in health policy and practice: a rapid review. Health Res Policy Syst. 2016;14(1):83. Epub 2016/11/26.

  146. Tricco AC, Langlois EV, Straus SE, editors. Rapid reviews to strengthen health policy and systems: a practical guide. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2017 Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO.

  147. Fretheim A, Schunemann HJ, Oxman AD. Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 3. Group composition and consultation process. Health Res Policy Syst. 2006;4:15. Epub 2006/12/01.

  148. Fretheim A, Schunemann HJ, Oxman AD. Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 5. Group processes. Health Res Policy Syst. 2006;4:17. Epub 2006/12/05.

  149. Boyd EA, Bero LA. Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 4. Managing conflicts of interests. Health Res Policy Syst. 2006;4(1):16.

  150. Andrews J, Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Alderson P, Dahm P, Falck-Ytter Y, et al. GRADE guidelines: 14. Going from evidence to recommendations: the significance and presentation of recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66(7):719–25. Epub 2013/01/15.

  151. The SURE Collaboration. SURE Guides for Preparing and Using Evidence-Based Policy Briefs. Version 2.1 [updated November 2011]: The SURE Collaboration; 2011 ( org/files/public/uploads/SURE-Guides-v2.1/ Collectedfiles/sure_guides.html, accessed 21 November 2021).

  152. Lavis JN, Oxman AD, Lewin S, Fretheim A. SUPPORT tools for evidence-informed health policymaking (STP). Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7 Suppl 1:I1.

  153. Peters DH, Tran NT, Adam T. Implementation research in health: a practical guide. Geneva: Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research, World Health Organization; 2013 ( hpsr/resources/implementationresearchguide/en/, accessed 21 November 2021).

  154. WHO evaluation practice handbook. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2013.

  155. Lavis JN, Permanand G, Oxman AD, Lewin S, Fretheim

    1. SUPPORT tools for evidence-informed health policymaking (STP) 13: preparing and using policy briefs to support evidence-informed policymaking. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7 Suppl 1:S13.

  156. Brouwers MC, Kho ME, Browman GP, Burgers JS, Cluzeau F, Feder G, et al. AGREE II: advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care. CMAJ. 2010;182(18):E839–42. Epub 2010/07/07.

  157. AdHopHTA partners. Tool 6 - AdHopHTA checklist for good-quality HB-HTA reports. The AdHopHTA toolkit: a toolkit for hospital-based Health Technology Assessment (HB-HTA); Public deliverable, The AdHopHTA Project (FP7/2007-13 grant agreement nr 305018)2015.

  158. Shea BJ, Grimshaw JM, Wells GA, Boers M, Andersson N, Hamel C, et al. Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007;7:10.

  159. Shea BJ, Hamel C, Wells GA, Bouter LM, Kristjansson E, Grimshaw J, et al. AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(10):1013–20.

  160. Whiting P, Savovic J, Higgins JP, Caldwell DM, Reeves BC, Shea B, et al. ROBIS: a new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;69:225–34.

  161. Brunetti M, Shemilt I, Pregno S, Vale L, Oxman AD, Lord J, et al. GRADE guidelines: 10. Considering resource use and rating the quality of economic evidence. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66(2):140–50. Epub 2012/08/07.

  162. Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gotzsche PC, Juni P, Moher D, Oxman AD, et al. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2011;343:d5928. Epub 2011/10/20.

  163. Sterne JAC, Savovic J, Page MJ, Elbers RG, Blencowe NS, Boutron I, et al. RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2019;366:l4898. Epub 2019/08/30.

  164. Sterne JA, Hernan MA, Reeves BC, Savovic J, Berkman ND, Viswanathan M, et al. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ. 2016;355:i4919. Epub 2016/10/14.

  165. Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC). Suggested risk of bias criteria for EPOC reviews. EPOC Resources for review authors 2017 ( resources-review-authors, accessed 15 November 2021).

  166. Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC). What study designs can be considered for inclusion in an EPOC review and what should they be called? 2021 ( zenodo.5106085, accessed 20 November 2021).

  167. Wells GA, Shea B, O’Connell D, Peterson J, Welch V, Losos M, et al. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. Ottawa, ON: Ottawa Hospital Research Institute; 2019 [updated 2019 (, accessed 19 November 2021).

  168. Viswanathan M, Berkman ND. Development of the RTI item bank on risk of bias and precision of observational studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2012;65(2):163–78.

  169. Viswanathan M, Berkman ND, Dryden DM, Hartling L. Assessing risk of bias and confounding in observational studies of interventions or exposures: further development of the RTI item bank. Methods research report. (Prepared by RTI–UNC Evidence- based Practice Center under Contract No. 290- 2007-10056-I). AHRQ Publication No. 13-EHC106-

    EF. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2013 (www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq. gov/reports/final.cfm, accessed 12 November 2021).

  170. Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME, Mallett S, Deeks JJ, Reitsma JB, et al. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155(8):529–36. Epub 2011/10/19.

  171. Aromataris E, Munn Z, editors. JBI manual for evidence synthesis. Adelaide: JBI; 2020 (https:// accessed 10 November 2021).

  172. A guide for evidence-informed decision-making, including in health emergencies (forthcoming). Washington, D.C.: Pan American Health Organization; 2022.

  173. Redman S, Greenhalgh T, Adedokun L, Staniszewska S, Denegri S. Co-production of knowledge: the future. BMJ. 2021;372:n434.

  174. Rycroft-Malone J, Burton CR, Bucknall T, Graham ID, Hutchinson AM, Stacey D. Collaboration and co-production of knowledge in healthcare: opportunities and challenges. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2016;5(4):221–3. Epub 2016/05/31.

  175. Tangcharoensathien V, Sirilak S, Sritara P, Patcharanarumol W, Lekagul A, Isaranuwatchai W, et al. Co-production of evidence for policies in Thailand: from concept to action. BMJ. 2021;372:m4669.

  176. Sangaleti C, Schveitzer MC, Peduzzi M, Zoboli E, Soares CB. Experiences and shared meaning of teamwork and interprofessional collaboration among health care professionals in primary health care settings: a systematic review. JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2017;15(11):2723–88. Epub 2017/11/15.

  177. How to collaborate successfully: sharing knowledge and expertise to drive innovation. Edinburgh, Scotland: Mindtools; 2018 [updated 16 July 2020] ( article/collaborate-successfully.htm, accessed 10 November 2021).

  178. Carr PB, Walton GM. Cues of working together fuel intrinsic motivation. J Exp Soc Psychol. 2014;53:169– 84.

  179. The 6 keys to effective collaboration in the workplace. Belmont CA: RingCentral ( blog/collaboration-in-the-workplace/, accessed 12 November 2021).

  180. Marshall IJ, Marshall R, Wallace BC, Brassey J, Thomas J. Rapid reviews may produce different results to systematic reviews: a meta-epidemiological study. J Clin Epidemiol. 2019;109:30–41.

  181. Gratton L, Erickson TJ. Eight ways to build collaborative teams. Harvard Business Review. 2007;85(11):100–9.

  182. Mumtaz GR, El-Jardali F, Jabbour M, Harb A, Abu- Raddad LJ, Makhoul M. Modeling the impact of COVID-19 vaccination in Lebanon: a call to speed-up vaccine roll out. Vaccines. 2021;9(7):697.

  183. Mumtaz G, Jabbour M, Makhoul M, Harb A, El-Jardali F. K2P COVID-19 Series: Modeling COVID-19 vaccine rollout in Lebanon for better impact (Full Version). Beirut, Lebanon: Knowledge to Policy (K2P) Center; 2021 ( Modeling%20COVID-19%20vaccine%20rollout_ full%20document_.pdf, accessed 1 December 2021).

  184. Lavis JN, Oxman AD, Lewin S, Fretheim A. SUPPORT tools for evidence-informed health policymaking (STP) 3: setting priorities for supporting evidence- informed policymaking. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7(1):S3.

  185. A systematic approach for undertaking a research priority-setting exercise: guidance for WHO staff. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2020 (https://, accessed 21 November 2021).

  186. Akl EA, Fadlallah R, Ghandour L, Kdouh O, Langlois E, Lavis JN, et al. The SPARK Tool to prioritise questions for systematic reviews in health policy and systems research: development and initial validation. Health Res Policy Syst. 2017;15(1):77.

  187. Schünemann H, Brozek J, Guyatt G, Oxman A, editors. Handbook for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations using the GRADE approach. Updated October 2013: GRADE Working Group; 2013 ( handbook/handbook.html, accessed 20 November 2021).

  188. Lavis JN, Oxman AD, Grimshaw J, Johansen M, Boyko JA, Lewin S, et al. SUPPORT tools for evidence-informed health policymaking (STP) 7: finding systematic reviews. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7(1):S7.

  189. Practical guidance for scaling up health service innovations. Geneva: World Health Organization, ExpandNet; 2009 (, accessed 20 November 2021).

  190. EVIPNet Europe. Communication and advocacy checklist. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2016.

  191. Nine steps for developing a scaling-up strategy. Geneva: World Health Organization, ExpandNet; 2010 (, accessed 15 November 2021).

  192. Fretheim A, Oxman AD, Lavis JN, Lewin S. SUPPORT tools for evidence-informed policymaking in health 18: planning monitoring and evaluation of policies. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7(1):S18.

No comments here
Why not start the discussion?