Rapid reviews in health policy: A study of intended use in the New South Wales' Evidence Check programme

Gabriel Mary Moore; Sally Redman; Tari Turner; Mary Haines

doi:10.1332/174426415X14446635524057

Rapid reviews in health policy: A study of intended use in the New South Wales' Evidence Check programme

Gabriel Mary Moore, Sally Redman, Tari Turner, Mary Haines

Research output: Contribution to journal › Review Article › Research › peer-review

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Rapid reviews of research are a key way in which policy makers use research. This paper examines 74 rapid reviews commissioned by health policy agencies through the Sax Institute's Evidence Check programme. We examine what prompted policy makers to commission rapid reviews, their purpose, how and when they intended to use them, and how this varied by agency. Policy makers commissioned rapid reviews primarily as part of planned policy processes and to identify alternative solutions to problems. Government departments responsible for multiple policy domains were more likely to commission rapid reviews for agenda setting and to test new ideas.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	505-519
Number of pages	15
Journal	Evidence and Policy
Volume	12
Issue number	4
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1332/174426415X14446635524057
Publication status	Published - 1 Nov 2016

Keywords

Evidence-based policy
Knowledge synthesis
Policy development
Rapid review

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1332/174426415X14446635524057

Cite this

@article{db711427f478495d8bfa4e27ae8f3c9c,

title = "Rapid reviews in health policy: A study of intended use in the New South Wales' Evidence Check programme",

abstract = "Rapid reviews of research are a key way in which policy makers use research. This paper examines 74 rapid reviews commissioned by health policy agencies through the Sax Institute's Evidence Check programme. We examine what prompted policy makers to commission rapid reviews, their purpose, how and when they intended to use them, and how this varied by agency. Policy makers commissioned rapid reviews primarily as part of planned policy processes and to identify alternative solutions to problems. Government departments responsible for multiple policy domains were more likely to commission rapid reviews for agenda setting and to test new ideas.",

keywords = "Evidence-based policy, Knowledge synthesis, Policy development, Rapid review",

author = "Moore, \{Gabriel Mary\} and Sally Redman and Tari Turner and Mary Haines",

year = "2016",

month = nov,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1332/174426415X14446635524057",

language = "English",

volume = "12",

pages = "505--519",

journal = "Evidence and Policy",

issn = "1744-2648",

publisher = "Policy Press",

number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Rapid reviews in health policy

T2 - A study of intended use in the New South Wales' Evidence Check programme

AU - Moore, Gabriel Mary

AU - Redman, Sally

AU - Turner, Tari

AU - Haines, Mary

PY - 2016/11/1

Y1 - 2016/11/1

N2 - Rapid reviews of research are a key way in which policy makers use research. This paper examines 74 rapid reviews commissioned by health policy agencies through the Sax Institute's Evidence Check programme. We examine what prompted policy makers to commission rapid reviews, their purpose, how and when they intended to use them, and how this varied by agency. Policy makers commissioned rapid reviews primarily as part of planned policy processes and to identify alternative solutions to problems. Government departments responsible for multiple policy domains were more likely to commission rapid reviews for agenda setting and to test new ideas.

AB - Rapid reviews of research are a key way in which policy makers use research. This paper examines 74 rapid reviews commissioned by health policy agencies through the Sax Institute's Evidence Check programme. We examine what prompted policy makers to commission rapid reviews, their purpose, how and when they intended to use them, and how this varied by agency. Policy makers commissioned rapid reviews primarily as part of planned policy processes and to identify alternative solutions to problems. Government departments responsible for multiple policy domains were more likely to commission rapid reviews for agenda setting and to test new ideas.

KW - Evidence-based policy

KW - Knowledge synthesis

KW - Policy development

KW - Rapid review

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85008350905

U2 - 10.1332/174426415X14446635524057

DO - 10.1332/174426415X14446635524057

M3 - Review Article

AN - SCOPUS:85008350905

SN - 1744-2648

VL - 12

SP - 505

EP - 519

JO - Evidence and Policy

JF - Evidence and Policy

IS - 4

ER -

Rapid reviews in health policy: A study of intended use in the New South Wales' Evidence Check programme

Abstract

Keywords

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Cite this