evidence-based management, health management research, hospital managers, knowledge translation, Lebanon | BACKGROUNDEvidence from health systems studies has persistently pointed out to a huge gap between what we know and what we do. 1 Health systems have been unsuccessful in making optimal use of the available knowledge to improve efficiencies, increase productivity, and enhance the well-being of people. 2,3 As a result, significant investments are wasted, and the resulting accumulating knowledge is underutilized.Knowledge synthesis products such as systematic reviews have arisen as support agents for decision making in clinical practice and policy making. 4 In one systematic review, the majority of studies reported a perceived usefulness of systematic reviews as assistants in decision making. 5 Other studies have revealed that systematically incorporating research evidence in program planning and policy decision making enhances the provision of high-quality, effective, and efficient health services and ensures a more liable use of the financial and human resource investments. 6-8 However, the availability of systematic reviews and their associated perceived usefulness do not necessarily ensure proper dissemination and uptake. 9-11 This might owe to the complex real world of policy making with all its associated economic, political, social, and ideological interactions that are taking place. 12 Other described forms of synthesized evidence include summaries of systematic reviews, overviews of systematic reviews, and policy briefs, all of which constitute knowledge translation resources. 13 Despite all of those available resources, knowledge is still underutilized by those for whom it is designed to inform, namely, policy and decision makers. In one systematic review designed to identify interventions aiming at encouraging the use of systematic reviews by health policy makers and health care managers, only 23% to 63% of surveyed respondents reported using systematic reviews to inform their decisions. 14 Numerous multilevel factors act as determinants for the uptake of evidence by policy and decision makers. These factors can be broadly stratified into those that operate at the health systems level such as financial disincentives, organizational level such as lack of appropriate equipment, teams level such as having local standards not in line with the desired practice, professionals level such as lack of knowledge and skills, and patients level such as poor adherence to advice. 15 At the health systems level, lack of relevance of the questions the reviews are addressing, 16-22 lack of contextualization of findings, 16-21 unwieldy size of the report, poor presentation format, 16,17 poor technical infrastructure, [23][24][25][26] poor communication channels, 27,28 untimeliness of the availability of evidence, 18-21,26-28 lack of access and time to seek and acquire systematic reviews, 16,17,[23][24][25] and lack of skills to appraise and apply the evidence 16-21,23-25 have been identified as barriers to using findin...

This guidebook provides national development banks (NDBs) a roadmap to integrating climate risk into their lending strategies and portfolio management in accordance with the recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures. The journey from little action on climate to becoming climate capable allows an NDB to better understand the financial risk to itself and its clients arising from climate change, and allows it to capture new opportunities. Making climate-informed investment and lending decisions and, in the long term, allocating capital in a manner that aligns with the global curbing of emissions is good business. This guidebook is written for those NDBs heeding the call to address the climate challenges in their countries as well as to raise awareness of the urgency to act on climate risks among those that are new to the topic. NDBs, as financial institutions, need to address the potential impacts on their existing and future portfolios and financial positions.

Educational reform has been a concerning matter to the Egyptian government since the 20th century. In order to address the educational problems, several initiatives have instigated a quantitative expansion approach, rather than a qualitative one. Existing building assessment methods convey sustainability principles to building design. However, they do not consider the school design as an active pedagogical tool for sustainable education and development. In addition they do not integrate other imperative parameters necessary for the effective learning and development of students. The developed guideline is divided into two school rating systems; new and existing. The guideline is further divided into three main sustainability categories: energy, water, and habitat. The directing parameters of the guideline are based on sustainable building assessment parameters, Egypt"s pressing social, economic and environmental concerns, pedagogy of educational environments, students" social, psychological, and developmental needs, in order to develop a holistic framework.

No abstract