1 of 5

Supporting evidence-based decision-making in health services research: experience from two responsive evidence synthesis programmes

Duncan Chambers, Anna Cantrell, Andrew Booth

School of Health & Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield

Presented by Duncan Chambers (d.chambers@Sheffield.ac.uk)

2 of 5

Background and methods

  • Decision-makers require rapid but rigorous evidence reviews to inform decision-making and identify gaps

​

  • Our team delivers rapid reviews for the NIHR HS&DR programme (ongoing contract) and the Health Foundation (competitive tendering)

​

  • We compared reviews commissioned by the two funders in terms of purpose, timescale and methods

3 of 5

Rapid review topics

  • HS&DR programme

​

    • Digital & online symptom checkers
    • Use of UEC by vulnerable groups
    • Preventable hospital admissions
    • Access to services for people with learning disabilities
    • Distance to emergency care
    • Recognition of risk & prevention in safeguarding
    • Inequalities of access in social care
  • Health Foundation

​

    • Knowledge mobilisation
    • Barriers and facilitators to implementing digital and data-driven technologies
    • Social care workforce

4 of 5

Why, how and how long?

  • Timescale 3 to 17 months (for review paused at funder’s request): Median 5 months
  • Main purpose (examples)
    • HS&DR: Support implementation of digital 111 service; supply evidence on impact of service reconfiguration; support improved/equitable access to services
    • Health Foundation: support development of KM strategy; identify ‘real world’ challenges; support workforce modelling
  • Diverse synthesis methods used
  • Initial scoping phase often required

5 of 5

Implications

  • Topics reflected the main issues faced by health and social care decision-makers (pre-pandemic):
    • Urgent & emergency care; digital innovation; workforce; health inequalities; emerging issues in social care
  • Working on two responsive programmes supported development of methodological and topic capacity
  • Lessons learnt in one programme can be applied in another:
    • Importance of initial mapping; value of frameworks
  • Evidence users can help by supplying a clear brief and regular interaction with the review team