Scholarlink

Introduction <p>Despite the global promotion of evidence-informed health policy-making, translating research into actionable policy remains a challenge across settings. While global frameworks have provided guidance, adaptation to local contexts remains limited. This study aimed to co-develop a practical, context-specific, stakeholder-informed research-to-policy (R2P) framework for Indonesia.</p> Methods <p>A multilevel qualitative study (May 2024–May 2025) combined a narrative literature review, expert consultations, and cognitive debriefing interviews. Literature searches in the WHO Library&#xa0;and PubMed, supplemented by reference list screening&#xa0;were conducted to explore barriers, enablers, and steps in evidence translation. Consultations involved researchers, policy-makers (national and subnational), and civil society to capture multi-stakeholder perspectives. A follow-up round of cognitive debriefing was conducted to refine the draft framework and guidance. All sessions were transcribed and analysed thematically using the Steps for Coding and Theorization (SCAT) approach. Findings were mapped against factors identified in the WHO EIDM framework on evidence uptake to inform the development of the final R2P framework.</p> Results <p>Seventeen participants contributed to framework co-development. The literature confirmed the absence of a formal R2P framework in Indonesia. Barriers included weak infrastructure, fragmented governance, low research capacity outside major centres, limited dissemination, and misalignment between research outputs and policy needs. Enablers included political commitment, knowledge-to-policy units, policy-relevant outputs, and collaborative relationships. For early researchers, policy-maker engagement, knowledge brokering, and institutional capacity building emerged as key needs. The resulting R2P framework comprises two interlinked domains: evidence generation and the policy process, highlighting continuous, multidirectional collaboration among academia, policy-makers, and communities.</p> Conclusions <p>The co-developed R2P framework offers a practical pathway to strengthen trust, accelerate translation, and promote inclusive, evidence-informed health policies. While tailored to Indonesia, its principles of early engagement, coproduction, contextual adaptation, and institutional capacity-building may be adapted across diverse health system settings.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Co-development of a research-to-policy framework for Indonesia’s health policy-making: a multiperspective approach

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年7月31日

查看全文
  • Ahmad Fuady,
  • Nico Gamalliel,
  • Deandra Ardya Sutoyo,
  • Kamilia Rifani Ufairah,
  • Fona Qorina,
  • Putri Prathiwi,
  • Ayers Gilberth Ivano Kalaij,
  • Abdillah Ahsan,
  • Taufique Joarder,
  • Mohammad Kurniawan

摘要

Introduction

Despite the global promotion of evidence-informed health policy-making, translating research into actionable policy remains a challenge across settings. While global frameworks have provided guidance, adaptation to local contexts remains limited. This study aimed to co-develop a practical, context-specific, stakeholder-informed research-to-policy (R2P) framework for Indonesia.

Methods

A multilevel qualitative study (May 2024–May 2025) combined a narrative literature review, expert consultations, and cognitive debriefing interviews. Literature searches in the WHO Library and PubMed, supplemented by reference list screening were conducted to explore barriers, enablers, and steps in evidence translation. Consultations involved researchers, policy-makers (national and subnational), and civil society to capture multi-stakeholder perspectives. A follow-up round of cognitive debriefing was conducted to refine the draft framework and guidance. All sessions were transcribed and analysed thematically using the Steps for Coding and Theorization (SCAT) approach. Findings were mapped against factors identified in the WHO EIDM framework on evidence uptake to inform the development of the final R2P framework.

Results

Seventeen participants contributed to framework co-development. The literature confirmed the absence of a formal R2P framework in Indonesia. Barriers included weak infrastructure, fragmented governance, low research capacity outside major centres, limited dissemination, and misalignment between research outputs and policy needs. Enablers included political commitment, knowledge-to-policy units, policy-relevant outputs, and collaborative relationships. For early researchers, policy-maker engagement, knowledge brokering, and institutional capacity building emerged as key needs. The resulting R2P framework comprises two interlinked domains: evidence generation and the policy process, highlighting continuous, multidirectional collaboration among academia, policy-makers, and communities.

Conclusions

The co-developed R2P framework offers a practical pathway to strengthen trust, accelerate translation, and promote inclusive, evidence-informed health policies. While tailored to Indonesia, its principles of early engagement, coproduction, contextual adaptation, and institutional capacity-building may be adapted across diverse health system settings.