Key Points Question How are drug company payments to health care organizations distributed in the UK health care system? Findings This cross-sectional study of the Disclosure UK database found that in 2015, 4028 health care organizations received US $72 110 156.6 from 100 companies. Although financial relationships were spread across the health care system, a few key donors and beneficiaries of industry funding were found. Meaning More policy attention is needed to disclose organizational conflicts of interests, particularly in areas of the health care system with a high concentration of industry payments.

IntroductionAhead of the implementation of a COVID-19 vaccination programme, the interdisciplinary Coronavax research team developed a multicomponent mixed methods project to support successful roll-out of the COVID-19 vaccine in Western Australia. This project seeks to analyse community attitudes about COVID-19 vaccination, vaccine access and information needs. We also study how government incorporates research findings into the vaccination programme.Methods and analysisThe Coronavax protocol employs an analytical social media study, and a qualitative study using in-depth interviews with purposively selected community groups. Participant groups currently include healthcare workers, aged care workers, first responders, adults aged 65+ years, adults aged 30–64 years, young adults aged 18–29 years, education workers, parents/guardians of infants and young children (<5 years), parents/guardians of children aged 5–18 years with comorbidities and parents/guardians who are hesitant about routine childhood vaccines. The project also includes two studies that track how Australian state and Commonwealth (federal) governments use the study findings. These are functional dialogues (translation and discussion exercises that are recorded and analysed) and evidence mapping of networks within government (which track how study findings are used).Ethics and disseminationEthics approval has been granted by the Child and Adolescent Health Service Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) and the University of Western Australia HREC. Study findings will be disseminated by a series of journal articles, reports to funders and stakeholders, and invited and peer-reviewed presentations.

Think-tanks and their researchers are located within an interstitial and ill-defined 'space between fields'; a space both constituted and divided by the worlds of academia, politics, journalism and business. This liminal position can be problematic for a think-tank researcher's intellectual credibility as they lack the recognised cultural and symbolic capital derived from being located within an established profession's jurisdiction. The question arises, how do think-tanks gain intellectual credibility? Drawing on interviews with think-tank researchers, this paper explores how these interstitial intellectuals produce policy reports. In following this process, we find that credibility emerges from a complex web of relationships across established fields/professions. Think-tank researchers must engage in a complex 'dance' of positioning the symbols, capitals and interests of a number of professions. To maintain their integrity, researchers must try to keep in step with competing interests from different professions; at times aligning them, at other times blocking or obscuring them from one another.

This paper explores the competing influences which inform public health policy and describes the role that research evidence plays within the policymaking process. In particular it draws on a recent English alcohol policy case study to assess the role of evidence in informing policy and practice. Semistructured interviews with key national, regional and local policy informants were transcribed and analysed thematically. A strong theme identified was that of the role of evidence. Findings are discussed in the context of competing views on what constitutes appropriate evidence for policy-making. KEYWORDS:Alcohol policy; evidence-based policy; evidence-informed policy, research evidence; England.Perceptions on the role of evidence 2 EVIDENCE INFORMED POLICYFrom the late 1990s, New Labour governments made the contention that public policy should be evidence-based, properly evaluated and informed by best practice (Cabinet Office, 1999). This commitment was operationalised by the creation of public service units and cross-departmental teams working on complex issues (for example, the Social Exclusion Unit). Since then there has been debate on whether the government has adhered to evidence-based policy-making (Bennett & Holloway, 2010). Nevertheless, the rhetoric has survived under the Coalition Government with a slight shift of emphasis from 'evidence-based' to 'evidence informed' policy. The newer term denotes recognition that evidence is only one of many competing influences on policy formation and the policy agenda. In addition, the dynamics of policy-making are also affected by institutional, professional and cultural factors which vary across different policy domains (Head, 2010). However, the requirement for reliable and valid information is generally considered by reformist governments to be one of the foundations for good policy and review processes (Shaxson, 2005).In practice, the policy-making process has many influences acting upon it, including: the experience, expertise and judgement of decision-makers, Evidence which appears persuasive to researchers is sometimes viewed less favourably by others involved in policy development and implementation. To politicians, policy-makers and practitioners, academic research can seem too abstruse, written in incomprehensible language and not sufficiently focussed on the practical day to day issues that are their main interest (MacGregor, 2010). For research to have an influence, policy-makers have reported that they seek the identification of new approaches to tackling persistent problems that prevent policy from being effective; research which uncovers new issues before they come to the attention of policy-makers; and research which provides accurate information and highlights examples of good practice.Attention also has to be given to the financial and policy implications and to the potential for scaling up initiatives (MacGregor, 2006). Despite these sometimes competing influences and cultural differences, research evidence can still maintain a role in the ...

No abstract