Evidence-Informed Policy-Making: Are We Doing Enough?; Comment on “Examining and Contextualizing Approaches to Establish Policy Support Organizations – A Mixed Method Study”

Document Type : Commentary


1 Department of Health Policy and Management, Guilford Glazer Faculty of Business and Management and Faculty of Health Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Be’er Sheva, Israel

2 Israel Implementation Science and Policy Engagement Centre, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Be’er Sheva, Israel

3 Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

4 Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Community Health Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Be’er Sheva, Israel


In their study of manifestations of policy support organizations (PSOs), Al Sabahi et al found that PSOs are united in their goal to support evidence-informed policy-making (EIPM), albeit with differing approaches. Their article is an important contribution to the body of research on evidence utilization and implementation. The unprecedented evidence climate presented by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) provides a unique window to motivate EIPM implementation. Research such as Al Sabahi and colleagues must prompt a dialogue regarding how best to address some of the current shortcomings in the field of EIPM. Monitoring and evaluation of best practices in EIPM is scarce. EIPM uptake is unsatisfactory, and the scientific community needs to ask itself why that is and what can be done. And, we should strive to develop a gradient that discerns between the convenient and the essential so countries can evaluate and pursue the policies to best address their greatest pain points through evidence.


  • epublished Author Accepted Version: February 20, 2022
  • epublished Final Version: March 7, 2022
  1. Al Sabahi S, Wilson MG, Lavis JN, El-Jardali F, Moat K, Vélez M. Examining and contextualizing approaches to establish policy support organizations-a critical interpretive synthesis. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2020. doi:34172/ijhpm.2020.181
  2. Kuchenmüller T, Chapman E, Takahashi R, et al. A comprehensive monitoring and evaluation framework for evidence to policy networks. Eval Program Plann. 2022;91:102053. doi:1016/j.evalprogplan.2022.102053
  3. Cairney P. How can policy theory have an impact on policymaking? The role of theory-led academic–practitioner discussions. Teach Public Adm. 2015;33(1):22-39. doi:1177/0144739414532284
  4. Lavis JN. Research, public policymaking, and knowledge-translation processes: Canadian efforts to build bridges. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2006;26(1):37-45. doi:1002/chp.49
  5. Oliver K, Lorenc T, Innvær S. New directions in evidence-based policy research: a critical analysis of the literature. Health Res Policy Syst. 2014;12:34. doi:1186/1478-4505-12-34
  6. Kotter J. Leading Change. New York: Harvard Business School Press; 2012.
  7. Kingdon J, Lovell A. Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/b601/985c67970ba87d79fabf6160ca91b1933003.pdf. Published 2010.
  8. Tragakes E, Vienonen M. Key Issues in Rationing and Priority Setting for Health Care Services. WHO Regional Office for Europe; 1998. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/1793/9b7221d5a5a25669df691c61b064d45e5826.pdf.
  9. Brambleby P, Fordham R. What is PBMA? Bandolier. 2003;4(2):1-6.
Volume 11, Issue 9
September 2022
Pages 1974-1976
  • Receive Date: 14 December 2021
  • Revise Date: 07 February 2022
  • Accept Date: 19 February 2022
  • First Publish Date: 20 February 2022