Research article

The impact of research on health education/health literacy on policymaking in Latin America and the Caribbean Region

  • Received: 11 December 2023 Revised: 19 February 2024 Accepted: 28 January 2024 Published: 18 March 2024
  • Background 

    In this study, we addressed the gap between health research and policymaking in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC), focusing on health education/health literacy. Despite growing research, translating findings into effective policies needs to be improved. We explored the factors that make research on health education and health literacy to be referenced and mentioned in policy documents in LAC (and in Peru). We proposed a model based on the hypothesis that the relationship between research and policymaking depends on the research strength of scientific evidence, timing, and social media activity.

    Methods 

    A mixed-methods approach was employed, combining quantitative and qualitative data analysis. Quantitative data sources included multidisciplinary databases, altmetric data, and citations of policy documents. For data analysis, we obtained descriptive statistics to identify patterns and then verified the association between variables using χ2. The negative binomial regression was used to test the empirical model introduced above. Quantitative analysis was complemented by analysis of responses to a set of open questions from a sample of Peruvian health policymakers.

    Results 

    We found that timing, strength of evidence, and social media activity were significant predictors of research cited in policy documents. Policy documents tended to rely more on qualitative evidence. A positive correlation between timing and cites in policy documents highlighted the importance of timely dissemination, whereas social media activity, while having an impact, had a relatively minor effect. Peruvian policymakers' responses emphasized the role of political context, the relevance of results, and policymakers' commitment to incorporating research into policies.

    Conclusion 

    Strength of evidence, social media engagement, and publication timing are key predictors of citations for health education/literacy research in LAC policy documents. However, qualitative findings highlight challenges, including some distrust in research findings, together with limited access to relevant research. The findings offer opportunities to enhance evidence-informed health education/health literacy policy decisions.

    Implications 

    To increase the influence on health policymakers, researchers should prioritize the timely dissemination of solid evidence, considering both traditional and digital platforms. Policymakers should focus on the quality and relevance of evidence when formulating policies.

    Citation: Carlos Vílchez-Román, Alberto Paucar-Caceres, Silvia Quispe-Prieto. The impact of research on health education/health literacy on policymaking in Latin America and the Caribbean Region[J]. AIMS Public Health, 2024, 11(2): 330-348. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2024017

    Related Papers:

  • Background 

    In this study, we addressed the gap between health research and policymaking in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC), focusing on health education/health literacy. Despite growing research, translating findings into effective policies needs to be improved. We explored the factors that make research on health education and health literacy to be referenced and mentioned in policy documents in LAC (and in Peru). We proposed a model based on the hypothesis that the relationship between research and policymaking depends on the research strength of scientific evidence, timing, and social media activity.

    Methods 

    A mixed-methods approach was employed, combining quantitative and qualitative data analysis. Quantitative data sources included multidisciplinary databases, altmetric data, and citations of policy documents. For data analysis, we obtained descriptive statistics to identify patterns and then verified the association between variables using χ2. The negative binomial regression was used to test the empirical model introduced above. Quantitative analysis was complemented by analysis of responses to a set of open questions from a sample of Peruvian health policymakers.

    Results 

    We found that timing, strength of evidence, and social media activity were significant predictors of research cited in policy documents. Policy documents tended to rely more on qualitative evidence. A positive correlation between timing and cites in policy documents highlighted the importance of timely dissemination, whereas social media activity, while having an impact, had a relatively minor effect. Peruvian policymakers' responses emphasized the role of political context, the relevance of results, and policymakers' commitment to incorporating research into policies.

    Conclusion 

    Strength of evidence, social media engagement, and publication timing are key predictors of citations for health education/literacy research in LAC policy documents. However, qualitative findings highlight challenges, including some distrust in research findings, together with limited access to relevant research. The findings offer opportunities to enhance evidence-informed health education/health literacy policy decisions.

    Implications 

    To increase the influence on health policymakers, researchers should prioritize the timely dissemination of solid evidence, considering both traditional and digital platforms. Policymakers should focus on the quality and relevance of evidence when formulating policies.



    加载中

    Acknowledgments



    This study is part of the research project Literacy under Covid-19 in Viñani/Alfabetización en Salud en Viñani (ALSAVI) in Tacna-Peru (https://alsavi.org/ and https://www.mmu.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/story/?id=15815) (accessed 15 February 2024). This project is funded by the Universidad Nacional Jorge Basadre Grohmann, Tacna, Peru, via the Canon Minero aid research program.
    Funding institution: Universidad Nacional Jorge Basadre Grohmann (UNJBG).

    Conflict of interest



    The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

    [1] Fretheim A, Munabi-Babigumira S, Oxman A, et al. (2009) SUPPORT tools for evidence-informed policymaking in Health 6: Using research evidence to address how an option will be implemented. Health Res Policy Syst 7: S6. https://doi.org/10.1186/1478-4505-7-S1-S6
    [2] Etienne LV, Becerrill MV, Young T, et al. (2016) Enhancing evidence-informed policymaking in complex health systems: Lessons from multi-site collaborative approaches. Health Res Policy Syst 14: 20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-016-0089-0
    [3] Trezona A, Dodson S, Mech P, et al. (2018a) Development and testing of a framework for analyzing health literacy in public policy documents. Glob Health Promot 25: 24-33. https://doi.org/10.1177/1757975918769616
    [4] Sato Y, Suzuki R, Shigihara M, et al. (2023) The effect of guardians' health literacy on the child's spending time at home: A cross-sectional study among Japanese schoolchildren. AIMS Public Health 10: 52-62. https://10.3934/publichealth.2023005
    [5] Wittich AR, Aubree SL, Flores B, et al. (2019) Colorectal cancer screening: Understanding the health literacy needs of Hispanic rural residents. AIMS Public Health 6: 107-120. https://doi.org/10.3934/publichealth.2019.2.107
    [6] Vamos SD, Okan O, Sentell T, et al. (2020) Making a case for “education for health literacy”: An international perspective. Intl J Env Res Public Health 17: 1436. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17041436
    [7] Trezona A, Rowlands G, Nutbeam D (2018b) Progress in implementing national policies and strategies for health literacy- What have we learned so far?. Intl J Env Res Public Health 15: 1554. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15071554
    [8] Liu C, Wang D, Liu C, et al. (2020) What is the meaning of health literacy? A systematic review and qualitative synthesis. Fam Med Community Health 8: e000351. https://doi.org/10.1136/fmch-2020-000351
    [9] Innvær S, Vist G, Trommald M, et al. (2002) Health policy-makers' perceptions of their use of evidence: a systematic review. J Health Serv Res Policy 7: 239-244. https://doi.org/10.1258/13558190232043277
    [10] Albert MA, Fretheim A (2007) Factors influencing the utilization of research findings by health policy-makers in a developing country: the selection of Mali's essential medicines. Health Res Policy Syst 5: 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/1478-4505-5-2
    [11] Oliver K, Innvær S, Lorenc T, et al. (2014) A systematic review of barriers to and facilitators of the use of evidence by policymakers. BMC Health Serv Res 14: 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-14-2
    [12] Akerlof K, Lemos MC, Cloyd E, et al. Barriers in Communicating Science for Policy in Congress, Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, 2018 Annual Conference Washington, DC (2018).
    [13] Pulido-Salgado M, Castaneda Mena FA (2021) Bringing policymakers to science through communication: A perspective from Latin America. Front Res Metr Analyt 6: 654191. https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2021.654191
    [14] Vanyoro KP, Hawkins K, Greenall M, et al. (2019) Local ownership of health policy and systems research in low-income and middle-income countries: a missing element in the uptake debate. BMJ Glob Health 4: e001523. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2019-001523
    [15] Vargas I, Eguiguren P, Mogollón-Pérez AS, et al. (2020) Understanding the factors influencing the implementation of participatory interventions to improve care coordination. An analytical framework based on an evaluation in Latin America. Health Pol Plann 35: 962-972. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czaa066
    [16] Wu S, Khan M, Legido-Quigley H (2020) What steps can researchers take to increase research uptake by policymakers? A case study in China. Health Pol Plann 35: 665-675. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czaa025
    [17] Shafaghat T, Bastani P, Nasab MHI, et al. (2022) A framework of evidence-based decision-making in health system management: a best-fit framework synthesis. Arch Public Health 80: 96. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13690-022-00843-0
    [18] El-Jardali F, Lavis JN, Ataya N, et al. (2012) Use of health systems evidence by policymakers in Eastern Mediterranean countries: Views, practices, and contextual influences. BMC Health Serv Res 12: 200. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-12-200
    [19] Mapulanga P, Raju J, Matingwina T (2020) Research-evidence-based health policy formulation in Malawi: An assessment of policymakers' and researchers' perspectives. Intl J Health Gov 25: 161-176. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJHG-05-2019-0029
    [20] Supplee LH, Kane MC (2020) The realities of scaling within evidence-based policy. Behav Public Pol 5: 90-102. https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2020.25
    [21] Verdugo-Paiva F, Bonfill X, Ortuño D, et al. (2023) Policymakers' perceived barriers and facilitators in the use of research evidence in oral health policies and guidelines: A qualitative study protocol. BMJ Open 13: e066048. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-066048
    [22] Grande D, Gollust SE, Pany M, et al. (2014) Translating research for health policy: Researchers' perceptions and use of social media. Health Aff 33: 1278-1285. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2014.0300
    [23] Rathore AK, Maurya D, Srivastava AK (2021) Do policymakers use social media for policy design? A Twitter analytics approach. Austral J Inform Syst 25: 2965. https://doi.org/10.3127/ajis.v25i0.2965
    [24] Nurmandi A, Wahyuni H, Guillamon MD, et al. (2023) Social media use for public policymaking cycle: A meta-analysis. Electron Gov 19: 123-145. https://doi.org/10.1504/EG.2023.129428
    [25] Kothari A, MacLean L, Edwards N, et al. (2011) Indicators at the interface: Managing policymaker-researcher collaboration. Knowl Manag Res Pract 9: 203-214. https://doi.org/10.1057/kmrp.2011.16
    [26] Corluka A, Hyder AA, Winch PJ, et al. (2014) Exploring health researchers' perceptions of policymaking in Argentina: A qualitative study. Health Policy Plann 29: ii40-ii49. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czu071
    [27] Corluka A, Hyder AA, Segura E, et al. (2015) Survey of Argentine health researchers on the use of evidence in policymaking. PLoS One 10: e0125711. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0125711
    [28] Hyder AA, Corluka A, Winch PJ, et al. (2010) National policy-makers speak out: Are researchers giving them what they need?. Health Policy Plann 26: 73-82. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czq020
    [29] Stellefson M, Black DR, Chaney BH, et al. (2020) Evolving role of social media in health promotion: Updated responsibilities for health education specialists. Int J Env Res Public Health 17: 1153. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17041153
    [30] Creswell JW, Plano Clark VL (2017) Designing and conducting mixed methods research.Sage.
    [31] Mahmood Z, Kouser R, Ali W, et al. (2018) Does corporate governance affect sustainability disclosure? A mixed methods study. Sustain 10: 207. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10010207
    [32] Bornmann L, Haunschild R, Thor A (2016) Policy documents as sources for measuring societal impact: How often is climate change research mentioned in policy-related documents?. Scientometrics 109: 1477-1495. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2115-y
    [33] Haunschild R, Williams K, Bornmann L (2023) How relevant is public policy and administration research for the policy sector? An empirical analysis based on Overton data. 27th International Conference on Science, Technology and Innovation Indicators (STI 2023) . Available from: https://dapp.orvium.io/deposits/6440f44400950d7e328907b2/view
    [34] Wagoner B, Mellish M, Hyman C, et al. (1997) Guide to research methods: The evidence pyramid. SUNY Downstate Medical Center . Available from: http://www.servers.medlib.hscbklyn.edu/ebm/2100.htm
    [35] Glover J, Izzo D, Odato K, et al. EBM Pyramid and EBM Page Generator (2005). Available from: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/856458054116360730/
    [36] Melnyk BM, Fineout-Overholt E (2005) Evidence-based practice in nursing and healthcare: A guide to best practice. Philadelphia: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins.
    [37] Tomlin G, Borgetto B (2011) Research pyramid: A new evidence-based practice model for occupational therapy. Am J Occup Ther 65: 189-196. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2011.000828
    [38] Alaniz AJ, Perez-Quezada JF, Galleguillos M, et al. (2019) Operationalizing the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems in public policy. Conserv Lett 12: e12665. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12665
    [39] Martín-Martín A, Orduna-Malea E, Thelwall M, et al. (2018) Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: A systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories. J Informetr 12: 1160-1177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.09.002
    [40] Sing VK, Sing P, Karmakar M, et al. (2021) The journal coverage of Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics 126: 5113-5142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03948-5
    [41] Kumpulainen M, Seppänen M (2022) Combining Web of Science and Scopus datasets in citation-based literature study. Scientometrics 127: 5613-5631. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04475-7
    [42] Fang Z, Costas R (2020) Studying the accumulation velocity of altmetric data tracked by Altmetric.com. Scientometrics 123: 1077-1101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03405-9
    [43] Karmakar M, Banshal SK, Sing VK (2021) A large scale comparison of coverage and mentions captured by the two altmetric aggregators: Altmetric.com and PlumX. Scientometrics 126: 4465-4489. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03941-y
    [44] Pinheiro H, Vignola-Gagné E, Campbell D (2021) A large-scale validation of the relationship between cross-disciplinary research and its uptake in policy-related documents, using the novel Overton altmetrics database. Quant Sci Stud 2: 616-642. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00137
    [45] Szomszor M, Adie E (2022) Overton: A bibliometric database of policy document citations. Quant Sci Stud 3: 624-650. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00204
    [46] Banshal SK, Verma MK, Yuvaraj M (2022) Quantifying global digital journalism research: A bibliometric landscape. Lib Hi Tech 40: 1337-1358. https://doi.org/10.1108/lht-01-2022-0083
    [47] Agresti A Categorical data analysis, Wiley-Interscience (2002).
    [48] Cameron AC, Trivedi PK (2013) Regression analysis of count data.Cambridge University Press.
    [49] Agresti A Foundations of linear and generalized linear models, Wiley (2015).
    [50] Cox TF, Ferry G (1993) Discriminant analysis using non-metric multidimensional scaling. Ptrn Recognit 26: 145-153. https://doi.org/10.1016/0031-3203(93)90096-F
    [51] Agarwal S, Lanckriet G, Wills J, et al. (2007) Generalized non-metric multidimensional scaling. J Mach Learn 2: 11-18. 11th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, AISTATS 2007
    [52] Ratti M, Milicia O, Rescinito R, et al. (2023) The determinants of expert opinion in the development of care pathways: Insights from an exploratory cluster analysis. BMC Health Serv 23: 211. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-023-09139-7
    [53] Aronson J (1994) A pragmatic view of thematic analysis. Qual Rep 2: 1-3. Available from: https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol2/iss1/3/
    [54] Hayes N (1997) Theory-led thematic analysis: Social identification in small companies. Doing qualitative analysis in psychology. Hove, England: Psychology Press 93-114.
    [55] Braun V, Clarke V (2006) Thematic analysis: Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psych 3: 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
    [56] Haskins R, Baron J (2011) Building the connection between policy and evidence: The Obama evidence-based initiatives. NESTA, United Kingdom . Available from: http://coalition4evidence.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Haskins-Baron-paper-on-fed-evid-based-initiatives-2011.pdf
    [57] Patiño D, Lavis JN, Moat K (2013) The role of research-based evidence in health system policy decision-making. Rev Salud Publica 15: 684-693.
    [58] Cardozo Brum M (2020) Evidence: concepts and uses in the evaluation of public policies and programs. Iztapalapa Rev Cienc Soc Humanid 42: 205-232. https://doi.org/10.28928/ri/902021/aot3/cardozobrumm
    [59] Martínez N (2012) Barreras en aplicación de los resultados de las investigaciones en sistemas y servicios de salud por los profesionales de enfermería. Hor Enferm 23: 23-31. Available from: https://ojs.uc.cl/index.php/RHE/article/view/12092
    [60] Díaz-Valdés A (2023) Políticas públicas: una mirada desde el enfoque basado en evidencia en trabajo social. Crit Prop Soc Work 5: 131-150. https://doi.org/10.5354/2735-6620.2023.68725
    [61] Camacho L, Montenegro G (2023) The implementation of public health policies: narrative review of models for analysis. Uninorte Health 39: 1153-1175. https://doi.org/10.14482/sun.39.03.258.963
    [62] CEPLANGuía de políticas nacionales 2018 (2018). Available from: https://cdn.www.gob.pe/uploads/document/file/1904157/GUIA-DE-POLITICAS-NACIONALES-CEPLAN-vNov2018.pdf
    [63] Jain N, Kourampi I, Umar TP, et al. (2023) Global population surpasses eight billion: Are we ready for the next billion?. AIMS Public Health 10: 849-866. https://doi.org/10.3934/publichealth.2023056
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2024 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(1471) PDF downloads(191) Cited by(0)

Article outline

Figures and Tables

Figures(5)  /  Tables(3)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog