Background: The concept of decision space holds appeal as an approach to disaggregating the elements that may influence decision-making in decentralized systems. This narrative review aims to explore the functioning of decision space and the factors that influence decision space. Methods: A narrative review of the literature was conducted with searches of online databases and academic journals including PubMed Central, Emerald, Wiley, Science Direct, JSTOR, and Sage. The articles were included in the review based on the criteria that they provided insight into the functioning of decision space either through the explicit application of or reference to decision space, or implicitly through discussion of decision-making related to organizational capacity or accountability mechanisms. Results: The articles included in the review encompass literature related to decentralisation, management and decision space. The majority of the studies utilise qualitative methodologies to assess accountability mechanisms, organisational capacities such as finance, human resources and management, and the extent of decision space. Of the 138 articles retrieved, 76 articles were included in the final review. Conclusion: The literature supports Bossert’s conceptualization of decision space as being related to organizational capacities and accountability mechanisms. These functions influence the decision space available within decentralized systems. The exact relationship between decision space and financial and human resource capacities needs to be explored in greater detail to determine the potential influence on system functioning.

BackgroundThe capacity to demand and use research is critical for governments if they are to develop policies that are informed by evidence. Existing tools designed to assess how government officials use evidence in decision-making have significant limitations for low- and middle-income countries (LMICs); they are rarely tested in LMICs and focus only on individual capacity. This paper introduces an instrument that was developed to assess Ministry of Health (MoH) capacity to demand and use research evidence for decision-making, which was tested for reliability and validity in eight LMICs (Bangladesh, Fiji, India, Lebanon, Moldova, Pakistan, South Africa, Zambia).MethodsInstrument development was based on a new conceptual framework that addresses individual, organisational and systems capacities, and items were drawn from existing instruments and a literature review. After initial item development and pre-testing to address face validity and item phrasing, the instrument was reduced to 54 items for further validation and item reduction. In-country study teams interviewed a systematic sample of 203 MoH officials. Exploratory factor analysis was used in addition to standard reliability and validity measures to further assess the items.ResultsThirty items divided between two factors representing organisational and individual capacity constructs were identified. South Africa and Zambia demonstrated the highest level of organisational capacity to use research, whereas Pakistan and Bangladesh were the lowest two. In contrast, individual capacity was highest in Pakistan, followed by South Africa, whereas Bangladesh and Lebanon were the lowest.ConclusionThe framework and related instrument represent a new opportunity for MoHs to identify ways to understand and improve capacities to incorporate research evidence in decision-making, as well as to provide a basis for tracking change.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12961-017-0227-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.