Do policy-makers find commissioned rapid reviews useful?

Area of Science:

• Health Policy Research
• Knowledge Translation
• Evidence-Informed Policymaking

Background:

• Rapid reviews (RRs) are increasingly utilized by policy agencies for timely access to research.
• Understanding the utilization of RRs by health policy agencies is crucial due to their growing number.
• This study investigated the use of RRs by Australian policymakers commissioned through a knowledge brokering program.

Purpose of the Study:

• To examine the extent and nature of rapid review utilization by Australian health policy agencies.
• To identify how rapid reviews were integrated into policy processes.
• To understand reasons for non-use of rapid reviews.

Main Methods:

• Analysis of interview data from 139 rapid reviews commissioned between 2006 and 2015.
• Coding transcripts to identify patterns of use, policy context, evidence of use, and reasons for non-use.
• Statistical assessment (Fisher's exact test) of variations in use across different agency types.

Main Results:

• 89% of commissioned rapid reviews were used by commissioning agencies, with an average of three instances of use per review.
• Primary uses included informing policy/programme details, setting priorities, negotiating decisions, evaluating solutions, and stakeholder communication.
• Observed variation in use across agencies; non-use linked to organizational or political changes.

Conclusions:

• Commissioned rapid reviews are highly utilized, predominantly in policy development, agenda-setting, and communication.
• Reviews were mainly used for instrumental and conceptual purposes, with limited symbolic application.
• Findings confirm rapid reviews as effective tools for delivering timely, relevant research for policy processes.