From evidence to decision in evidence-based social science: insights from the Evidence Commission Report_Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Authors：

YU Xuan ¹ , SONG Xuping ^2,3,4 , WANG Qi ³ , YANG Kehu ^1,2,4 ,  CHEN Yaolong ^1,2,4,5,6

1. Evidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, P. R. China;
2. Evidence-based Social Science Research Center, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, P. R. China;
3. Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton L8S 4L6, Canada;
4. Innovation Laboratory for Evidence-based Social Science, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, P. R. China;
5. Research Unit of Evidence-Based Evaluation and Guidelines, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (2021RU017), School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, P. R. China;
6. WHO Collaborating Centre for Guideline Implementation and Knowledge Translation, Lanzhou 730000, P. R. China;

Corresponding?author：

CHEN Yaolong, Email: chenyaolong@lzu.edu.cn

Keywords：

Evidence Commission Report; Evidence-based social science; Evidence-informed decision-making; Evidence

DOI：

10.7507/1672-2531.202305075

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

As the global health crisis erupts, there is an unprecedented focus on evidence across all sectors, becoming a critical trigger for changing research plans, development, synthesis, implementation, and evidence-informed decision-making. The establishment of the Global Commission on Evidence and the publication of two reports further emphasize the significance of evidence-informed decision-making in addressing social challenges. With the dissemination and development of evidence-based social science, there is a need to continually improve the ecosystem from evidence to decision and provide rigorous methods and approaches for different decision-makers to address social challenges. This article aims to interpret the Evidence Commission Report and explain the demand and supply of evidence, global public goods, and eight most-important Evidence Commission recommendations that can be used to address most social challenges. It also presents the key issues and insights that the evidence-based social science ecosystem faces from evidence to decision-making, putting evidence at the center of everyday work and life.

Citation： YU Xuan, SONG Xuping, WANG Qi, YANG Kehu, CHEN Yaolong. From evidence to decision in evidence-based social science: insights from the Evidence Commission Report. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2023, 23(10): 1229-1235. doi: 10.7507/1672-2531.202305075 Copy

1.	應對社會挑戰的全球證據委員會. 證據委員會報告: 為決策者、證據中介和以影響力為導向的證據生產者敲響警鐘并指明前進道路. 漢密爾頓: 麥克馬斯特衛生論壇, 2022.
2.	Abbott R, Bethel A, Rogers M, et al. Characteristics, quality and volume of the first 5 months of the COVID-19 evidence synthesis infodemic: a meta-research study. BMJ Evid Based Med, 2022, 27(3): 169-177.
3.	Valerie Pattyn. Beware of Evidence! Why (some) citizens do not want more scientific evidence and what role trust plays in this. European Commission. 2022.
4.	Vickery J, Atkinson P, Lin L, et al. Challenges to evidence-informed decision-making in the context of pandemics: qualitative study of COVID-19 policy advisor perspectives. BMJ Glob Health, 2022, 7(4): e008268.
5.	應對社會挑戰的全球證據委員會. 全球證據委員會報告(2023更新版): 加強國家證據支持系統, 改善全球證據架構, 讓證據成為日常生活的中心. 漢密爾頓: 麥克馬斯特衛生論壇, 2023.
6.	Guyatt G, Cairns J, Churchill D, et al. Evidence-based medicine: a new approach to teaching the practice of medicine. JAMA, 1992, 268(17): 2420-2425.
7.	楊克虎. 循證社會科學的產生, 發展與未來. 圖書與情報, 2018, 3(1): 10.
8.	Weiss CH. The many meanings of research utilization. Public Administration Review, 1979, 39(5): 426-431.
9.	Serra-Garcia M, Gneezy U. Nonreplicable publications are cited more than replicable ones. Sci Adv, 2021, 7(21): eabd1705.
10.	Dunn HL. Application of statistical methods in physiology. Physiol Rev, 1929, 9: 275-398.
11.	陳耀龍. 醫學研究報告規范的發展與簡介. 蘭州大學學報(醫學版), 2022, 48(1): 1-4.
12.	Wang X, Welch V, Li M, et al. The methodological and reporting characteristics of Campbell reviews: a systematic review. Campbell Syst Rev, 2021, 17(1): e1134.
13.	Li X, Li Y, Guo K, et al. Evidence based social science in China paper 3: the quality of social science RCTs published from 2000-2020. J Clin Epidemiol, 2022, 141: 64-73.
14.	Evidence based social science in China paper 4 : the quality of social science systematic reviews and meta-analysis published from 2000-2019.
15.	Pederson H, Okland T, Boyers LN, et al. Identifying otolaryngology systematic review research gaps: comparing Global Burden of Disease 2010 results with Cochrane database of systematic review content. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 2015, 141(1): 67-72.
16.	Chapman E, Reveiz L, Chambliss A, et al. Cochrane systematic reviews are useful to map research gaps for decreasing maternal mortality. J Clin Epidemiol, 2013, 66(1): 105-112.
17.	Saran A, White H, Albright K, et al. Mega-map of systematic reviews and evidence and gap maps on the interventions to improve child well-being in low- and middle-income countries. Campbell Syst Rev, 2020, 16(4): e1116.
18.	UN 2.0 quintet of change.
19.	楊開峰, 魏夏楠. 政府循證決策: 美國聯邦政府的實踐及啟示. 經濟社會體制比較, 2021, (3): 139-149.
20.	Sage WM, Yang YT. Reducing "COVID-19 misinformation" while preserving free speech. JAMA, 2022, 327(15): 1443-1444.
21.	Broadband Commission for Sustainable Development. Balancing act: countering digital disinformation while respecting freedom of expression. Geneva and Paris: International Telecommunication Union and United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 2020.
22.	Stewart R, Boutron I, Akl EA. The Global Evidence Commission's report provided a wake-up call for the evidence community. J Clin Epidemiol, 2023, 154: 212-215.
23.	WHO. Evidence briefs for policy.
24.	Yu X, Wang Q, Moat K, et al. Development of a STandard reporting guideline for Evidence briefs for Policy (STEP): context and study protocol. Health Res Policy Syst, 2022, 20(1): 82.
25.	Schardt C. Health information literacy meets evidence-based practice. J Med Libr Assoc, 2011, 99(1): 1-2.
26.	Craig E. Developing online information literacy courses for NHSScotland. Health Info Libr J, 2007, 24(4): 292-297.
27.	Nsangi A, Semakula D, Oxman AD, et al. Effects of the informed health choices primary school intervention on the ability of children in Uganda to assess the reliability of claims about treatment effects: a cluster-randomised controlled trial. Lancet, 2017, 390(10092): 374-388.
28.	Semakula D, Nsangi A, Oxman AD, et al. Effects of the informed health choices podcast on the ability of parents of primary school children in Uganda to assess claims about treatment effects: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet, 2017, 390(10092): 389-398.

1. 應對社會挑戰的全球證據委員會. 證據委員會報告: 為決策者、證據中介和以影響力為導向的證據生產者敲響警鐘并指明前進道路. 漢密爾頓: 麥克馬斯特衛生論壇, 2022.
2. Abbott R, Bethel A, Rogers M, et al. Characteristics, quality and volume of the first 5 months of the COVID-19 evidence synthesis infodemic: a meta-research study. BMJ Evid Based Med, 2022, 27(3): 169-177.
3. Valerie Pattyn. Beware of Evidence! Why (some) citizens do not want more scientific evidence and what role trust plays in this. European Commission. 2022.
4. Vickery J, Atkinson P, Lin L, et al. Challenges to evidence-informed decision-making in the context of pandemics: qualitative study of COVID-19 policy advisor perspectives. BMJ Glob Health, 2022, 7(4): e008268.
5. 應對社會挑戰的全球證據委員會. 全球證據委員會報告(2023更新版): 加強國家證據支持系統, 改善全球證據架構, 讓證據成為日常生活的中心. 漢密爾頓: 麥克馬斯特衛生論壇, 2023.
6. Guyatt G, Cairns J, Churchill D, et al. Evidence-based medicine: a new approach to teaching the practice of medicine. JAMA, 1992, 268(17): 2420-2425.
7. 楊克虎. 循證社會科學的產生, 發展與未來. 圖書與情報, 2018, 3(1): 10.
8. Weiss CH. The many meanings of research utilization. Public Administration Review, 1979, 39(5): 426-431.
9. Serra-Garcia M, Gneezy U. Nonreplicable publications are cited more than replicable ones. Sci Adv, 2021, 7(21): eabd1705.
10. Dunn HL. Application of statistical methods in physiology. Physiol Rev, 1929, 9: 275-398.
11. 陳耀龍. 醫學研究報告規范的發展與簡介. 蘭州大學學報(醫學版), 2022, 48(1): 1-4.
12. Wang X, Welch V, Li M, et al. The methodological and reporting characteristics of Campbell reviews: a systematic review. Campbell Syst Rev, 2021, 17(1): e1134.
13. Li X, Li Y, Guo K, et al. Evidence based social science in China paper 3: the quality of social science RCTs published from 2000-2020. J Clin Epidemiol, 2022, 141: 64-73.
14. Evidence based social science in China paper 4 : the quality of social science systematic reviews and meta-analysis published from 2000-2019.
15. Pederson H, Okland T, Boyers LN, et al. Identifying otolaryngology systematic review research gaps: comparing Global Burden of Disease 2010 results with Cochrane database of systematic review content. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 2015, 141(1): 67-72.
16. Chapman E, Reveiz L, Chambliss A, et al. Cochrane systematic reviews are useful to map research gaps for decreasing maternal mortality. J Clin Epidemiol, 2013, 66(1): 105-112.
17. Saran A, White H, Albright K, et al. Mega-map of systematic reviews and evidence and gap maps on the interventions to improve child well-being in low- and middle-income countries. Campbell Syst Rev, 2020, 16(4): e1116.
18. UN 2.0 quintet of change.
19. 楊開峰, 魏夏楠. 政府循證決策: 美國聯邦政府的實踐及啟示. 經濟社會體制比較, 2021, (3): 139-149.
20. Sage WM, Yang YT. Reducing "COVID-19 misinformation" while preserving free speech. JAMA, 2022, 327(15): 1443-1444.
21. Broadband Commission for Sustainable Development. Balancing act: countering digital disinformation while respecting freedom of expression. Geneva and Paris: International Telecommunication Union and United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 2020.
22. Stewart R, Boutron I, Akl EA. The Global Evidence Commission's report provided a wake-up call for the evidence community. J Clin Epidemiol, 2023, 154: 212-215.
23. WHO. Evidence briefs for policy.
24. Yu X, Wang Q, Moat K, et al. Development of a STandard reporting guideline for Evidence briefs for Policy (STEP): context and study protocol. Health Res Policy Syst, 2022, 20(1): 82.
25. Schardt C. Health information literacy meets evidence-based practice. J Med Libr Assoc, 2011, 99(1): 1-2.
26. Craig E. Developing online information literacy courses for NHSScotland. Health Info Libr J, 2007, 24(4): 292-297.
27. Nsangi A, Semakula D, Oxman AD, et al. Effects of the informed health choices primary school intervention on the ability of children in Uganda to assess the reliability of claims about treatment effects: a cluster-randomised controlled trial. Lancet, 2017, 390(10092): 374-388.
28. Semakula D, Nsangi A, Oxman AD, et al. Effects of the informed health choices podcast on the ability of parents of primary school children in Uganda to assess claims about treatment effects: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet, 2017, 390(10092): 389-398.

Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

From evidence to decision in evidence-based social science: insights from the Evidence Commission Report

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Previous Article

Next Article

Format

Content