14 Chapter 1 In their definition of evidence-informed2 decision-making (EIDM), the WHO argues that scientific evidence is insufficient to address the context in which decisions are made, which is inherently local, political and shaped by institutional constraints and individual interests and preferences [63]. Tacit or colloquial evidence should also play a role. This type of knowledge is “mostly informal, and often includes opinions, values and habits of policy-makers, clinicians, patients or citizens expressed in different forms in formal deliberative dialogues, on websites, in policy documents, reports, and other formats” [63]. In the context of evidence-informed practices, scientific and tacit evidence would have a complementary rather than competitive relationship, in which the latter would complement and enquire about the appropriateness of the former to the (local) contexts in which decisions are made [63]. Figure 1. Evidence creation funnel. Source: Evidence, policy, impact. WHO guide for evidenceinformed decision-making [63]. 2 Recently, WHO has put emphasis on the use of the term evidence-informed over evidence-based policy-making. This accounts for the fact that evidence is often only one of several factors influencing policy-making processes. It also uses decision instead of policy as the former is broader and encompasses all the types of decision-making for which evidence might be relevant.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjY0ODMw