[MUSIC] You now know that it's not enough to ask what can work, but it's imperative to also ask how, why, when, and for whom it can work. You also know that this is particularly important when considering scaling up interventions or programs nationally, but even more so when trying to transfer knowledge across different countries and regions. To date, efforts to facilitate evidence informed policymaking have been made at various levels on global, regional, and national levels. And there's some excellent examples I'd like to share with you. I'll start with broad examples of efforts and initiatives to develop and enable evidence informed policymaking, then I'll move on to specific country case examples. An example of a global initiative is the evidence informed policy network, EVIPnet, which was established by the World Health Organization in 2005 to promote systematic use of health research evidence in policymaking, with a particular focus on low and middle income countries. Teams are coordinated at global, regional, and even country levels, whereby EVIPnet helps create partnerships between policy makers, researchers, and civil societies for evidence-informed decision making. There's also the international decision support initiative, iDSI, which is a global network of health, policy, and economic expertise working to achieve universal health coverage and the health sustainable development goal, SDG3. An example of a region level initiative is the Regional East African Community Health policy initiative, REACH. Which is an initiative of various stakeholders in Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda, supported by the International Development Research Center in Canada, the Swiss tropical Institute as well as the Alliance for health policy and Systems Research, to function as a bridge linking health researchers and policymakers. On national levels, there are many exemplary institutions that generate and disseminate research. An example of which is the FUNSALUD, the Mexican health foundation which is an autonomous non-profit civil association founded in 1985 which provides analysis and evaluation of relevant health issues and works with national ministries of health to appraise, synthesize, and use the evidence to inform decision making. The Health Intervention and Technology Assessment Program, HiTAP, a semi autonomous research arm of the Bureau of Policy and Strategy at the Ministry of Health in Thailand is also great example. HiTAP was established in 2007 as a non-profit organization in order to take responsibility for appraising a wide range of health technologies and programs. Including individual and community health promotion, as well as social health policy to inform policy decisions in Thailand. In 2013, HiTAP established an international unit drawing on its expertise locally and internationally, to work at the global level with overseas development aids, international organizations, nonprofit organizations, and overseas governments, to build capacity for health technology assessment worldwide. Now let's explore some country specific examples of evidence informed policy in action. First, let's go to Brazil. And the case of Piripiri, which is a testament of how research evidence can translate into high impact local policies that change people's lives. In this case, research explored the impact of primary healthcare actions on perinatal infant mortality. And presented options in the form of policy briefs for the options available to local health managers in reducing infant mortality. Arrangements regarding service delivery and perinatal care policies were then discussed in a policy dialogue with the local health council which was then approved by them. This has led to engaging municipal decision makers in Piripiri to address perinatal mortality which helps reduce mortality rates from 21 per thousand live births in 2009 to seven in 2011, a remarkable achievement. This model is now being replicated in other places through local level working groups dealing with local questions and problems and developing evidence briefs on issues such as congenital heart disease, air pollution, and even road traffic deaths. In Lebanon, to help inform the provision of health services for refugees, a team at the Center for Systematic Reviews on Health Policy and Systems Research applied knowledge production and translation tools such as priority setting, systematic reviews, developing of briefing notes, and organizing national dialogues. This resulted in implementing and monitoring a national health response strategy and a more effective coordination and monitoring of the flow of aid. And in Mozambique where steps were taken to prepare the evidence briefs to support widespread use of artemisinin-based combination therapy, ACT, to treat uncomplicated malaria. And viable policy options were presented each accompanied by an assessment of cost and potential impact on the country's health system. This influenced radical change and provided the Ministry of Health with options for managing uncomplicated malaria by community health workers, which led effective malaria treatment at community level. And contributed to a reduction in child deaths from malaria, which is the major cause of hospital admission in children under five in the country. All the case studies I mentioned and more are in your readings. So please go through them to learn more about evidence informed policymaking. In summary, evidence inform policymaking have been taking place at various levels on global, regional, and national levels. Examples you've just heard about include institutions such as EVIPnet, REACH, FULSALUD, and HiTAP which spanned across the globe. These institutions and their teams of health policy and systems researchers have been more likely to have an impact because of the collaboration and synergistic effort with National Ministries of Health, to appraise, synthesize and use the evidence to inform decision making. [MUSIC]
