Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 15, 2025

A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting
Published on: January 12, 2018
Use and value of systematic reviews in English local authority public health: a qualitative study
1Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK. emily.south@york.ac.uk.
Background:
Responsibility for public health in England transferred from the National Health Service to local authorities in 2013, representing a different decision-making environment. Systematic reviews are considered the gold standard of evidence for clinical decision-making but little is known about their use in local government public health. This study aimed to explore the extent to which public health decision-makers in local authorities engage with systematic reviews and how they do so.
Methods:
Semi-structured interviews were conducted with senior public health practitioners (n = 14) in Yorkshire and the Humber local authorities. Sampling was purposive and involved contacting Directors of Public Health directly and snowballing through key contacts. Face-to-face or telephone interviews were digitally recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using the Framework Method.
Results:
Public health practitioners described using systematic reviews directly in decision-making and engaging with them more widely in a range of ways, often through a personal commitment to professional development. They saw themselves as having a role to advocate for the use of rigorous evidence, including systematic reviews, in the wider local authority. Systematic reviews were highly valued in principle and public health practitioners had relevant skills to find and appraise them. However, the extent of use varied by individual and local authority and was limited by the complexity of decision-making and various barriers. Barriers included that there were a limited number of systematic reviews available on certain public health topics, such as the wider determinants of health, and that the narrow focus of reviews was not reflective of complex public health decisions facing local authorities. Reviews were used alongside a range of other evidence types, including grey literature. The source of evidence was often considered an indicator of quality, with specific organisations, such as Public Health England, NICE and Cochrane, particularly trusted.
Conclusions:
Research use varies and should be considered within the specific decision-making and political context. There is a need for systematic reviews to be more reflective of the decisions facing local authority public health teams.
More Related Videos
06:16Involving Individuals with Developmental Language Disorder and Their Parents/Carers in Research Priority Setting
Published on: June 6, 2020
08:36Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment
Published on: April 19, 2024
Related Concept Videos
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Purpose of Health Records I
Here's a breakdown of how health records serve these purposes:
Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - II
Study Designs in Epidemiology
Observational studies are those where the researcher does not intervene but rather observes natural variations. They include cross-sectional, cohort, and...
Bias in Epidemiological Studies
Methods Of Healthcare Delivery System
Managed Care System:
The managed care system is designed to control the cost while maintaining the quality of care. The patient's care from admission to discharge is planned by the primary care provider or the case manager, also known as the gatekeeper. In a managed care system, the number of care providers is...