Back to Annual Meeting Page		American Public Health Association 133rd Annual Meeting & Exposition December 10-14, 2005 Philadelphia, PA

Abstract #109830

Maureen Jennifer Dobbins, PhD¹, Kara L. DeCorby, MSc², Shawna L. Mercer, PhD³, Donna Ciliska, PhD⁴, Stephen R. Manske, EdD⁵, Steven Hanna, PhD⁶, Roy Cameron, PhD⁵, Linda O'Mara, RN, PhD¹, Helen Thomas, MSc⁷, and Christina Mills, MD, FRCPC⁸. (1) Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, 1200 Main Street West, 3H46D, Hamilton, ON L8N 3Z5, Canada, 905 525-9140 ext 22481, dobbinsm@mcmaster.ca, (2) City of Hamilton Public Health & Community Services, 2 King Street West, 3rd Floor, Dundas, ON L9H 6Z1, Canada, (3) Office of the Chief of Science, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Highway N.E., MS K56, Atlanta, GA 30341, (4) School of Nursing, McMaster University, Hamilton Public Health and Community Services, PHRED program, 1200 Main St W, Hamilton, ON L8N 3Z5, Canada, (5) Centre for Behavioural Research & Program Evaluation, University of Waterloo, Lyle Hallman Institute, Waterloo, ON N2L 3G1, Canada, (6) Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, 1200 Main Street West, Institute for Applied Health Sciences-Rm 408, Hamilton, ON L8N 3Z5, Canada, (7) School of Nursing, McMaster University, Hamilton Public Health and Community Services, PHRED program, 1200 Main St W, Hamilton, ON L8N 3Z5, Canada, (8) Canadian Cancer Society, 11 Huron Ave. North, Ottawa, ON K1Y 0W1, Canada

INTRODUCTION: Translating research into practice requires decision-makers to become aware of, accept and incorporate research evidence into policy and program decisions. The objective of this study is to develop and make available a comprehensive registry of published systematic reviews evaluating the impact of public health and health promotion initiatives. METHODS: Systematic reviews were identified through a comprehensive search strategy (1985-present) that included: electronic searches of 6 databases, handsearching of more than 50 journals, and reviewing reference lists. All reviews deemed relevant were keyworded for major topic areas and assessed for methodological quality by two independent reviewers. In addition qualitative interviews were conducted with public health decision-makers across Canada to determine their needs and preferences for receiving this research evidence. RESULTS: Data from the qualitative interviews demonstrated that public health decision makers have a strong desire for a national repository of research evidence that is assessed for methodological quality and disseminated to them on a regular basis. This has led to the development of www.health-evidence.ca, a registry of more than 500 reviews, which will be launched in February 2005. The functions of the website respond directly to the needs and preferences identified in the interviews. CONCLUSIONS: The creation of a registry of reviews in collaboration with multiple agencies provides an opportunity to promote the transfer and uptake of research evidence into public health. At the time of the 2005 APHA conference, nine months of data will be available on the use of and perceived usefulness of this registry.

Learning Objectives:

• To explore public health decision-makers' preferences for recieving research evidence
• To describe an innovative approach to promote the transfer and uptake of research evidence to public health decision-makers
• To evaluate the use of and perceived usefulness of www.health-evidence.ca

Keywords: Evidence Based Practice, Health Information Systems

Presenting author's disclosure statement:

I wish to disclose that I have NO financial interests or other relationship with the manufactures of commercial products, suppliers of commercial services or commercial supporters.

Recorded presentation