Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 2, 2025
Involving Individuals with Developmental Language Disorder and Their Parents/Carers in Research Priority Setting
Published on: June 6, 2020
Advancing the WHO-INTEGRATE Framework as a Tool for Evidence-Informed, Deliberative Decision-Making Processes:
Jan M Stratil1,2, Deepak Paudel3, Karen E Setty4
1Institute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry, and Epidemiology - IBE, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Background:
Decision-making on matters of public health and health policy is a deeply value-laden process. The World Health Organization (WHO)-INTEGRATE framework was proposed as a new evidence-to-decision (EtD) framework to support guideline development from a complexity perspective, notably in relation to public health and health system interventions, and with a foundation in WHO norms and values. This study was conducted as part of the development of the framework to assess its comprehensiveness and usefulness for public health and health policy decision-making.
Methods:
We conducted a qualitative study comprising nine key informant interviews (KIIs) with experts involved in WHO guideline development and four focus group discussions (FGDs) with a total of forty health decision-makers from Brazil, Germany, Nepal and Uganda. Transcripts were analyzed using MAXQDA12 and qualitative content analysis.
Results:
Most key informants and participants in the FGDs appreciated the framework for its relevance to real-world decision-making on four widely differing health topics. They praised its broad perspective and comprehensiveness with respect to new or expanded criteria, notably regarding societal implications, equity considerations, and acceptability. Some guideline developers questioned the value of the framework beyond current practice and were concerned with the complexity of applying such a broad range of criteria in guideline development processes. Participants made concrete suggestions for improving the wording and definitions of criteria as well as their grouping, for covering missing aspects, and for addressing overlap between criteria.
Conclusion:
The framework was well-received by health decision-makers as well as the developers of WHO guidelines and appears to capture all relevant considerations discussed in four distinct real-world decision processes that took place on four different continents. Guidance is needed on how to apply the framework in guideline processes that are both transparent and participatory. A set of suggestions for improvement provides a valuable starting point for advancing the framework towards version 2.0.
More Related Videos
14:43A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting
Published on: January 12, 2018
06:05The Participant-Reported Implementation Update and Score PRIUS: A Novel Method for Capturing Implementation-Related Data Over Time
Published on: February 19, 2021
Related Concept Videos
01:28International Nursing Organizations II
The WHO provides expert team support, including funding, vaccines, testing, and treatment tools at the country level to fight...
01:09Decision Making: P-value Method
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is proposed. The claim is based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to the claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses: a null hypothesis would be a neutral statement while the alternative hypothesis can...
01:29Impression Management Techniques III: Aligning Actions
01:14Decision Making: Traditional Method
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is decided based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to this claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses, out of which a null hypothesis would be a...
01:25Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
01:11Guidelines for Writing Outcome
Patient outcomes reflect the patient's response to the goal rather than what the nurse aims to achieve. Terminology should be observable and measurable to avoid the reader's interpretation. The desired outcome should be realistic and achievable in the designated care timeframe. Expected outcomes should align with adjunctive therapies. The outcome should enhance care...