Evidence-to-decision frameworks: a review and analysis to inform decision-making for environmental health interventions

Author:

Norris Susan L.ORCID,Aung Max T.,Chartres NicholasORCID,Woodruff Tracey J.ORCID

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundEvidence-to-decision (EtD) frameworks provide a structured and transparent approach for groups of experts to use when formulating recommendations or making decisions. While extensively used for clinical and public health recommendations, EtD frameworks are not in widespread use in environmental health.ObjectivesThis review sought to identify, compare and contrast key EtD frameworks for decisions or recommendations on interventions used in clinical medicine, public health or environmental health. Our goal was to identify best practices and guidance which will be used to inform the development of an EtD framework for formulating recommendations regarding interventions to prevent or mitigate the harmful effects of exposure to substances in the environment.MethodsWe identified a convenience sample of EtD frameworks used by a range of organizations. We searched Medline for systematic reviews of EtD frameworks used in clinical medicine, and public or environmental health. In a qualitative manner, we summarized the decision criteria in the selected frameworks and in the reviews.ResultsFourteen key organizations provided 18 EtD frameworks; most frameworks focused on clinical medicine or public health interventions; four focused on environmental health and three on economic considerations. Only one framework was based on an underlying conceptual model, and rarely was a systematic review of potential criteria performed during the frameworks development. GRADE encompasses a set of closely related frameworks for different types of decisions. Harms of interventions were examined in all frameworks and benefits in all but one. Other criteria included certainty of the body of evidence (15 frameworks), resource considerations (15), feasibility (13), equity (12), values (11), acceptability (11), and human rights (2). There was variation in how specific criteria were defined. The five identified systematic reviews reported a similar spectrum of EtD criteria.DiscussionThe EtD frameworks examined encompassed similar criteria, with tailoring to specific audience needs. However, there is variation in development processes, terminology, level of detail provided and presentation of the criteria. Existing frameworks are a useful starting point for development of one tailored to decision-making in environmental health.

Publisher

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

Reference77 articles.

1. Systematic Review and Evidence Integration for Literature-Based Environmental Health Science Assessments

2. An Evidence-Based Medicine Methodology To Bridge The Gap Between Clinical And Environmental Health Sciences

3. International Agency for Research on Cancer. IARC Monographs on the Identification of Carcinogenic Hazards to Humans. Lyon, France.2019.

4. National Academies of Sciences EaM. The Use of Systematic Review in EPA’s Toxic Substances Control Act Risk Evaluations. Washington, DC;2021.

5. Going from evidence to recommendations

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3