Background Evidence-informed policy-making (EIPM) requires a set of individual and organizational capacities, linked with background factors and needs. The identification of essential knowledge, skills and attitudes for EIPM can support the development of competency profiles and their application in different contexts. Purpose To identify elements of competency (knowledge, skills and attitudes) for EIPM, according to different professional profiles (researcher, health professional, decision-maker and citizen). Methods Rapid umbrella review. A structured search was conducted and later updated in two comprehensive repositories (BVSalud and PubMed). Review studies with distinctive designs were included, published from 2010 onwards, without language restrictions. Assessment of the methodological quality of the studies was not performed. A meta-aggregative narrative synthesis was used to report the findings. Results Ten reviews were included. A total of 37 elements of competency were identified, eight were categorized as knowledge, 19 as skills and 10 as attitudes. These elements were aggregated into four competency profiles: researcher, health professional, decision-maker and citizen. The competency profiles included different sets of EIPM-related knowledge, skills and attitudes. Strengths and limitations This study is innovative because it aggregates different profiles of competency from a practical perspective, favouring the application of its results in different contexts to support EIPM. Methodological limitations are related to the shortcuts adopted in this review: complementary searches of the grey literature were not performed, and the study selection and data extraction were not conducted in duplicate. Final considerations: conclusions and implications of the findings EIPM requires the development of individual and organizational capacities. This rapid review contributes to the discussion on the institutionalization of EIPM in health systems. The competency profiles presented here can support discussions about the availability of capacity and the need for its development in different contexts.

Background Health evidence needs to be communicated and disseminated in a manner that is clearly understood by decision-makers. As an inherent component of health knowledge translation, communicating results of scientific studies, effects of interventions and health risk estimates, in addition to understanding key concepts of clinical epidemiology and interpreting evidence, represent a set of essential instruments to reduce the gap between science and practice. The advancement of digital and social media has reshaped the concept of health communication, introducing new, direct and powerful communication platforms and gateways between researchers and the public. The objective of this scoping review was to identify strategies for communicating scientific evidence in healthcare to managers and/or population. Methods We searched Cochrane Library, Embase®, MEDLINE® and other six electronic databases, in addition to grey literature, relevant websites from related organizations for studies, documents or reports published from 2000, addressing any strategy for communicating scientific evidence on healthcare to managers and/or population. Results Our search identified 24 598 unique records, of which 80 met the inclusion criteria and addressed 78 strategies. Most strategies focused on risk and benefit communication in health, were presented by textual format and had been implemented and somehow evaluated. Among the strategies evaluated and appearing to yield some benefit are (i) risk/benefit communication: natural frequencies instead of percentages, absolute risk instead relative risk and number needed to treat, numerical instead nominal communication, mortality instead survival; negative or loss content appear to be more effective than positive or gain content; (ii) evidence synthesis: plain languages summaries to communicate the results of Cochrane reviews to the community were perceived as more reliable, easier to find and understand, and better to support decisions than the original summaries; (iii) teaching/learning: the Informed Health Choices resources seem to be effective for improving critical thinking skills. Conclusion Our findings contribute to both the knowledge translation process by identifying communication strategies with potential for immediate implementation and to future research by recognizing the need to evaluate the clinical and social impact of other strategies to support evidence-informed policies. Trial registration protocol is prospectively available in MedArxiv (doi.org/10.1101/2021.11.04.21265922).

À memória de Edvaldo, meu pai, e Carmen, minha avó, os quais me ensinaram o rigor e a gentileza que procuro levar comigo na vida, e que me esforcei por trazer também para este trabalho. À Maria do Carmo, minha mãe, cuja força e ternura inquebrantáveis me deram todas as condições necessárias para a realização de mais este projeto. Em cada linha acertada deste trabalho vocês estão presentes, e por isso lhes sou infinitamente grato.

Background Theory of Change (ToC) has become an established approach to design and evaluate interventions. While ToC should—in line with the growing international focus on evidence-informed health decision-making–consider explicit approaches to incorporate evidence, there is limited guidance on how this should be done. This rapid review aims to identify and synthesize the available literature on how to systematically use research evidence when developing or adapting ToCs in the health sector. Methods A rapid review methodology using a systematic approach, was designed. Eight electronic databases were consulted to search for peer-reviewed and gray publications detailing tools, methods, and recommendations promoting the systematic integration of research evidence in ToCs. The included studies were compared, and the findings summarized qualitatively into themes to identify key principles, stages, and procedures, guiding the systematic integration of research evidence when developing or revising a ToC. Results This review included 18 studies. The main sources from which evidence was retrieved in the ToC development process were institutional data, literature searches, and stakeholder consultation. There was a variety of ways of finding and using evidence in ToC. Firstly, the review provided an overview of existing definitions of ToC, methods applied in ToC development and the related ToC stages. Secondly, a typology of 7 stages relevant for evidence integration into ToCs was developed, outlining the types of evidence and research methods the included studies applied for each of the proposed stages. Conclusion This rapid review adds to the existing literature in two ways. First, it provides an up-to-date and comprehensive review of the existing methods for incorporating evidence into ToC development in the health sector. Second, it offers a new typology guiding any future endeavors of incorporating evidence into ToCs.

Background Evidence-Informed Policymaking (EIPM) require a set of individual and organizational capabilities, articulated with background factors and needs. The identification of essential Knowledge, Skills and Attitudes for EIPM can support the formulation of competency profiles and their application in different contexts. Purpose To identify elements of competency (Knowledge, Skills and Attitudes) for EIPM, according to different professional profiles. Methods Rapid scoping review. A structured search was led, and later updated in two comprehensive repositories (BVSalud and PubMed). Review studies with different designs, published from 2010 onwards, without language restriction were included. Assessment of the methodological quality of the studies was not performed. A meta-aggregative narrative synthesis consolidated the findings. Results Ten reviews were included. Eight elements were categorized as Knowledge, 19 as Skills and 10 as Attitudes were identified, totaling 37 elements of competency. These elements were aggregated into four competency profiles (Researcher, Health Professional, Decision-maker and Citizen). The competency profiles included different sets of EIPM-related Knowledge, Skills and Attitudes. Strengths and limitations This study is innovative because it aggregates different profiles of competency and uses a practical perspective, favoring the application of its results in different contexts, to support EIPM. Methodological limitations are related to the shortcuts adopted in this review, especially as it does not include complementary searches of the grey literature and does not carry out, in duplicate, the stages of study selection and data extraction. Final considerations: conclusions and implications of the findings EIPMs require the development of individual and organizational capacities. This rapid scoping review contributes to the discussion on the institutionalization of EIPM in health systems. The competency profiles presented here can support discussions about the availability and need for capacity development in different contexts.