1、Evidence Commission update 2023Strengthening domestic evidence-support systems,enhancing the global evidence architecture,and putting evidence at the centre of everyday lifeGlobal Commission on Evidence to Address Societal ChallengesGlobal Commission on Evidenceto Address Societal ChallengesCopyrigh

2、t 2023 McMaster University.All rights reserved.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.Adaptations of this work can be shared provided it is done with the same or compatible licence.The work can be copied,distributed and displayed

3、 for non-commercial purposes.This report and the information contained herein are for informative,public interest purposes only.While the secretariat has attempted to ensure that the information was up-to-date and accurate at the time of writing,the information is distributed on an as-is basis,witho

4、ut warranty express or implied.The information contained in this report is not meant to substitute for financial,legal or medical advice.McMaster University,the Evidence Commission secretariat and the publisher assume no responsibility or liability for loss or damage caused or allegedly caused,direc

5、tly or indirectly,by the use of the information contained in this report.McMaster University,the secretariat and the publisher specifically disclaim any liability incurred from the use or application of the information contained in this report.The publisher of this report is the McMaster Health Foru

6、m,1280 Main St.West,MML-417,Hamilton,ON,Canada L8S 4L6.Acting as the secretariat for the Evidence Commission,the McMaster Health Forum welcomes feedback about Update 2023,as well as expressions of interest in contributing to or complementing efforts related to the three implementation priorities.Ple

7、ase send your comments to evidencecommissionmcmaster.ca.The appropriate citation for this report is:Global Commission on Evidence to Address Societal Challenges.Evidence Commission update 2023:Strengthening domestic evidence-support systems,enhancing the global evidence architecture,and putting evid

8、ence at the centre of everyday life.Hamilton:McMaster Health Forum,2023.ISBN(online):978-1-927565-51-33One year has passed since the publication of the Evidence Commission report,which is now available in seven languages and in multiple formats.We see reasons for optimism,as well as reasons to doubl

9、e-down on efforts to implement the reports recommendations.While government policymakers in some countries(like newly elected ones in some Latin American countries)are open to new approaches to decision-making and evidence use,many policymakers,organizational leaders and professionals have largely r

10、eturned to pre-pandemic approaches.While some funders and donors and some impact-oriented evidence producers have piloted coordination mechanisms,many evidence producers continue to operate without coordination and to generate significant research waste.While many citizens have become more aware of

11、the potential value of evidence,many others have become more distrustful of decision-makers and evidence.This(first)annual update is focused on three implementation priorities:Introduction These implementation priorities were agreed in partnership with the producers of the two other global reports p

12、ublished on this topic in the last 18 months,namely Cochrane Convenes and the Global Evidence-to-Policy Summit.The priorities are being addressed with the support of the Evidence Commission Implementation Council and three other groups(see appendix 1).The priorities collectively cover 20 of the Evid

13、ence Commissions 24 recommendations and do so as a more actionable package(see appendix 2).Underpinning these three priorities is the growing recognition of how evidence can be used to address societal challenges,as well as about the many other steps needed to support citizens.Below and over the nex

14、t two pages we review some of the key concepts from the Evidence Commission report to set the stage for what follows.We need to respond to decision-makers questions with the right mix of forms of evidence.This means matching the forms of domestic evidence to the right step in the decision-making pro

15、cess.We illustrate this point on the next page in the infographic on the left.This also means not falling back on the select forms of evidence that happen to get a lot of attention now,such as data analytics and evaluation.We illustrate this point in the infographic on the right.Data analytics seems

16、 to be weighing even more heavily in decision-makers minds than a year ago,which is why it appears larger than evaluation.Modeling is getting less attention,which is why it has been moved onto the right side of the scale with the other forms of evidence.Formalize and strengthen domestic evidence-sup

17、port systemsEnhance and leverage the global evidence architecturePut evidence at the centre of everyday life4In addition to matching the forms of domestic evidence to the right step in the decision-making process(which we illustrate in a different way below in the top third of the infographic),we ne

18、ed to combine domestic evidence(what has been learned in our country)and global evidence(what has been learned from around the world,including how it varies by groups and contexts).We illustrate the latter point below in the middle third of the infographic.We return later in this report to the role

19、of the global evidence architecture(e.g.,contributors such as Campbell and Cochrane)in supplying such global evidence in the form of an evidence synthesis.Combining domestic and global evidence can take the form of recommendations,as we illustrate in the bottom third of the infographic.Modeling Beha

20、vioural/implementation research Qualitative insights Evidence synthesis Technology assessment Guidelines Data analytics EvaluationVantage pointForms of evidenceSteps where it adds the greatest valueDomestic evidenceDataanalyticsModellingEvaluationBehavioural/implementation researchQualitative insigh

21、tsVantage pointForms of evidenceGlobal evidenceEvidence synthesisAn evidence synthesis:systematically and transparently identifies,selects,assesses and synthesizes the evidence addressing a specific question includes explicit quality assessments(and doesnt accept a journals peer review as synonymous

22、 with quality)and can itself be assessed for quality(and quality ratings are included in many evidence-synthesis databases like Social Systems Evidence)can address any question and synthesize any type of evidence can also describe how much certainty we have about particular findingsVantage pointForm

23、s of evidenceDomesticrecommendations or evidence support informed by domestic and global evidenceTechnology assessment/cost-effectiveness analysisGuidelineForms of evidenceForms of evidenceUnderstanding a problem and its causesForms of evidenceSelecting an option for addressing the problemIdentifyin

24、g implementation considerations Data analytics Modeling Qualitative insights Modeling Evaluation Qualitative insights Data analytics Qualitative insightsForms of evidenceMonitoring implementation and evaluating impacts Data analytics Evaluation Qualitative insights53 12We need to use best evidence a

25、nd not the other things that get a lot of attention now.We illustrate this point in the left side of the infographic below.We contrast one of these other things old-school expert panels with a gold medal-deserving version on the right side of the infographic below.Another way of approaching the use

26、of evidence is to embed evidence in cycles of rapid learning and improvement.Talk of learning health systems can be applied equally well to learning climate-adaptation systems and learning education systems.Here again we need to match the forms of evidence to the right step.We can draw on stocks of

27、existing evidence while also generating flows of new evidence as we move through learning and improvement cycles.Make sense of market&population,and then prioritizeWhere are system gaps and whats driving them?Where are the inequities?What priorities are we addressing(or what problems are we solving)

28、?QuestionsStocks of existing evidenceQualitative insights Evidence synthesisData analytics ModelingCo-design new services&service modelsWhat evidence-informed solutions exist?How will solutions be adapted/designed with input from system users and communities?Evidence synthesisTechnology assessmentsG

29、uidelinesEvaluationModelingQualitative insightsImplement,and then adapt using system-level monitoring&evaluation Does this model work?How&for whom?What adaptations are needed to cement&scale?Data analyticsEvaluationBehavioural/implementation researchQualitative insightsEvidence synthesisFlows of new

30、 evidenceFirst two columns adapted from Reid R,Wodchis W,Lee-Foon N,and Institute for Better Health-Trillium Health Partners(2022)Best evidence for the type of question being askedSingle studies(or preprints)that havent been appraised for quality and placed alongside all other studies addressing the

31、 same questionSqueaky-wheel experts who dont speak in a way that make it possible to judge their accuracy Old-school expert panels using a GOBSATT approachCitizen-and stakeholder-engagement processes that dont provide ways in for evidenceExpert panels that:convene people with the right mix of issue-

32、specific knowledge,evidence-appraisal expertise,and lived experience follow rigorous processes to develop their recommendations(e.g.,pre-circulate evidence summaries and clarify what evidence and experiences underpin the recommendations)adjust their recommendations as the context,issues and evidence

33、 evolve(in the case of living expert panels)Expert panels using a GOBSATT(good old boys sitting around the table)approachGoldWill never make it to the podiumIf Australia can go for the gold with its national health guidelines,why cant we do it in our country and for other sectors?6Formalize and stre

34、ngthen domestic evidence-support systemsDrawing on websites,documents and interviews,a RESSA involves asking questions about each of the potential features of an evidence-support system as a baseline and taking action based on what is learned.Examples of these questions are listed below,and the pote

35、ntial features of an evidence-support system are shown in light green in the infographic on the next page.For each agency,department or body on the evidence-demand side What types of decisions are made and what does this mean for the types of evidence needed?What sources of evidence are currently dr

36、awn upon(e.g.,domestic data analytics and evaluations,evidence syntheses,expert panels like the gold medal-deserving one on the previous page)?Are the enablers(e.g.,explicit standard for evidence use in cabinet submissions),culture and capacity in place?For the demand side of any coordination mechan

37、ism Are there people who have experience with horizon scanning and with prioritizing and scoping questions in all decision-making steps?Are the questions typically similar to those being asked by other groups and is a mechanism in place to share questions and responses across groups?Are the question

38、s typically complex and do they require the engagement of multiple evidence-support units?The first of three implementation priorities formalize and strengthen evidence-support systems provides the mechanisms for on-the-ground impacts with the second priority and it can underpin many of the mechanis

39、ms with the third priority.The Evidence Commissions secretariat and its partners in 12 countries are conducting rapid evidence-support system assessments,or RESSAs,and sharing lessons learned through the RESSA Country Team Leads Group.The goal in each country is to identify what is going well that n

40、eeds to be systematized and scaled up,and what gaps should be prioritized to fill,and to work with government policymakers,organizational leaders,professionals and citizens to push for improvements.Conducting a RESSA starts with a solid understanding of what a domestic evidence-support system is and

41、 how it differs from research and innovation systems.An evidence-support system includes many types of infrastructure Structures and processes on the evidence-demand side to:incorporate evidence use into routine advisory and decision-making processes(e.g.,ministerial briefings,cabinet submissions,bu

42、dget proposals,spending plans)build and sustain an evidence culture(e.g.,requirements for transparency in evidence inputs)strengthen capacity for evidence use(as well as broader policy and program capacity)among policy and program staff,government science advisors,and those supporting expert panels

43、and citizen-and stakeholder-engagement processes Coordinatoin mechanisms at the interface between the evidence demand and supply sides to:elicit and prioritize the evidence needs of decision-makers and their advisors package evidence from multiple sources into inputs that align with the requirements

44、 of advisory and decision-making processes Evidence-support units(in-house or within partner organizations)on the evidence-supply side that:understand the domestic context,evidence standards,and decision-makers preferred communication formats are timely and demand-driven focus on contextualizing the

45、 stock of existing evidence both domestic evidence(in its many forms)and global evidence for a given decision in an equity-sensitive way(and can also contribute to the flow of future evidence)The research system tends to focus on creating generalizable knowledge and to measure success with peer-revi

46、ewed grants and publications(although this is beginning to shift as a result of the Declaration on Research Assessment)The innovation system tends to focus on commercializing products and processes and to measure success with revenuesEvidence-support systemResearchsystemInnovationsystem 7 For the su

47、pply side of any coordination mechanism Are there people who can act as general contractors and bring in the right trades,or forms of evidence,depending on the question?for changes to policy and system arrangements,these are typically policy and systems researchers for behaviour changes among profes

48、sionals and citizens,these are typically behavioural/implementation researchers Is it possible to provide integrated responses that may take the form of one or more of:evidence scan across all applicable forms of evidence(to capture best evidence)jurisdictional scan(to learn from the experiences of

49、other countries)horizon scan(to leverage foresight work done nationally and globally)key-informant interviews(to leverage rich experiences)deliberative processes(to engage citizens and stakeholders in collective problem-solving)?For the evidence-supply side Are all forms of evidence covered by exist

50、ing evidence-support units of the type described in the first infographic?Examples of the types of things we are hearing from these RESSAs are provided in the comment boxes that appear in light grey.In brief,most countries have few of the features of an evidence-support system,and even fewer working

51、 optimally,especially when crises emerge.A documented example of a RESSA,in this case for a specific sector,can be found here.Government policymakers in central agencies,line departments,and legislativebodies(and organizational leaders)with separate or shared evidence demandsEvidence-demand coordina

52、tion(horizon scanning and prioritization of questions)One-window requests(when complex questions)Integrated responses(when multiple inputs)Evidence-supply coordinationEvidence-support networkProvides evidence-supply coordination(when there is a willingness to collaborate)and liaises with the global

53、evidence architecture Evidence-support units focused on a specific form of evidence Global evidence architecture Living evidence syntheses (global public goods)Living evidence products may also exist for data analytics,modeling and guidelines(see corresponding section)Data analytics Modeling Evaluat

54、ions Behavioural/implementation research Qualitative insights Evidence synthesis (contextualized)Technology assessment/cost-effectiveness analysis Guidelines Evidence-support units focused on sectors or other substantive domains(and providing multiple forms of evidence)Climate action,education,healt

55、h,etc.We have some pockets of excellence in decision-making and evidence use,but mostly were focused on evidence about the problem;were weaker on options and implementationWe have several leading-edge groups in government,but generally we suffer from a hollowing out of our policy capacity and a fail

56、ure to keep up with new developments in evidence useWe do fairly well with data analytics,somewhat well with evaluation(although we still dont use it to drive ongoing learning and improvement),and poorly with other forms of evidenceWe need to complement these forms of evidence with lived experiences

57、 and with Indigenous ways of knowingWe sometimes stumble upon a high-quality living evidence synthesis,but mostly we rely on an informal literature review to complement what we learned from our one domestic studyWe mostly rely on in-house staff and a few management-consulting firms,but we have no me

58、chanisms to get the right questions to best-in-class and service-oriented evidence-support units and to incorporate their insights into policies and programsWe showed we could be transparent with travel and expense claims;a commitment to transparency with our evidence inputs would transform our orga

59、nizational culture8The second implementation priority enhance and leverage the global evidence architecture is a key enabler of the first priority and of the evidence-informed efforts of multilateral organizations to support their member states.We have witnessed ongoing leadership by WHO in improvin

60、g its processes for developing normative guidance,such as through living guidelines and more generally high-quality guidelines(if not yet as visibly in its technical-cooperation activities).We have also noted pockets of leadership at other UN system entities,such as UNICEF and UNDP.We have seen litt

61、le response from other multilateral organizations.We are aware of some pilots but no broad efforts to coordinate the production of evidence-related global public goods.This has meant a continued low signal-to-noise ratio with uneven coverage,low quality and outdatedness the pattern for both Sustaina

62、ble Development Goal-focused evidence syntheses and COVID-19-focused evidence syntheses as well as continued duplication and hence research waste.We are also aware of many anecdotal examples of funders and donors and global public-goods producers going their own way even when made aware of how they

63、would be contributing to research waste.The Evidence Commission secretariat and its partners are speaking with many funders and donors and with many global public-goods producers(through the Global Evidence Producers Group).The secretariat and its partners are also conducting an assessment of past e

64、fforts to enhance aspects of the global evidence architecture.The goal is to develop one or more viable models and to seek funding and the support of evidence producers to pilot the model and then to scale it up based on lessons learned.These areas of focus for our efforts appear in colour in the in

65、fographic below,while the engagement of multilateral organizations appears greyed out and will be the focus of future efforts.Enhance and leverage the global evidence architectureGlobal hybrid decision-makers and intermediaries(e.g.,global commissions and technical units within the global,regional a

66、nd country offices of multilateral organizations that support member states)Global hybrid evidence intermediaries and producers(e.g.,Cochrane and Intergovernmental Panelon Climate Change(IPCC)working groups)Global levelDomestic level Hybrid Hybrid Hybrid Hybrid Local hybriddecision-makers and interm

67、ediaries(e.g.,domestic commissions,government advisory bodies,government science advice,and government evidence support)Local hybridevidence intermediaries and producers(e.g.,local evidence-support units focused on specific forms of evidence,sectors,etc.)Domestic evidence-support networksTechnicalas

68、sistanceNormative guidanceEvidence-related global public goods,especially living evidence synthesesDecision-makersDecision-makersIntermediaries Intermediaries ProducersProducersFuller list of networks and platforms to complement the second bullet in the next infographic:Networks of producers of glob

69、al public goods include those focused on evidence syntheses,such as 3IE,Campbell,Cochrane,Collaboration for Environmental Evidence,and JBI,as well as CAMARADES and SYRCLE addressing animal studies,and those focused on other forms of evidence,such as IPCC focused on modeling.Platforms that support th

70、e production of global public goods include examples such as Cochrane Engage for translation,Covidence,EPPI-Reviewer,GRADEpro,PROSPERO,EQUATOR and RIGHT.Networks of guideline and technology-assessment groups that use these global public goods include examples such as AGREE,GIN and GRADE for guidelin

71、es and HTAi and INAHTA for technology assessments,as well as those that use them to produce living guidelines,such as the Living Evidence Alliance.Networks of groups producing these and other forms of evidence for decision-making include examples such as the Evidence Collaborative for the Triple Bil

72、lions,Evidence Synthesis International,and the What Works Global Summit.9FundersanddonorsGlobalpublic-goodsproducingteamssupportnetworksDomesticevidence-BESTEVIDENCEIMPACTS$Globalpublic-goodsproducingteamssupportnetworksDomesticevidence-BESTEVIDENCEIMPACTSOne possible model for improving the product

73、ion and use of global public goods like living evidence syntheses starts with better connecting the global evidence architecture to domestic evidence-support systems.We illustrate this in the infographic below.Funding can then be a powerful lever for change.Moreover,we can better address many domest

74、ic evidence needs just with the money saved from research waste in the production of what purport to be global public goods.Global public-goods producing teams Each commits to respond to emerging global priorities in ways that increase coordination and reduce duplication in the production of living

75、evidence syntheses They collectively commit to work with existing networks and platforms to maximize efficiencies and synergies and to strengthen and implement standards(for a fuller list,see the footnote on the preceding page)Networks of producers of global public goods(e.g.,Campbell,Cochrane,IPCC)

76、Platforms that support the production of global public goods(e.g.,PROSPERO)Networks of guideline and technology-assessment groups that use these global public goods Domestic evidence-support networks that use these global public goods and that can bring forward the perspectives of many types of deci

77、sion-makers who use these global public goods(government policymakers,organizational leaders,professionals,and citizens)Domestic evidence-support networks Each commits to respond to emerging domestic priorities in ways that leverage and enable the implementation of global public goods(e.g.,through c

78、ontextualized evidence synthesis and support)and to support the continuous improvement of global public goods(through partnerships with teams in their region or with similar topic coverage)They collectively commit to work with existing networks and platforms to maximize efficiencies and synergies an

79、d to strengthen and implement standards Networks of evidence-support units(e.g.,Brazil Coalition for Evidence,What Works Network in the U.K.,EVIPNet in low-and middle-income countries)Funders and donors Global funders,national funders and donors collectively commit to supporting an evolving suite of

80、 living evidence syntheses addressing periodically and dynamically prioritized questions(e.g.,X teams equitably distributed around the globe addressing Y questions)Their collaboration could progress Share information coordinate pool funds They can issue calls with common standards for teams about:pr

81、ocesses(e.g.,machine learning;merit review by decision-makers,evidence intermediaries,and evidence producers;immediate online posting of updates)products(e.g.,foreground equity and context considerations;infographics;downloadable data;open-access publishing)partnerships(e.g.,co-production with domes

82、tic evidence-support networks and domestic pools of citizen partners)They can measure and manage teams performance(e.g.,responsive to needs,agile in finding ways to add value,reliable in quality and timeliness,and partnered with impact-focused domestic evidence-support networks)Complemented by natio

83、nal entities funding domestic evidence-support networks(and global funders and donors helping to fund those based in low-and middle-income countries)Better connect global and domesticUse funding as a lever for changeThe Living Evidence Alliance is a promising prototype,but we have a long way to go w

84、ith hundreds of low-quality evidence syntheses for unimportant questions and none for many of societys most important questionsWe were able to respond to a question from national policymakers with a contextualized evidence synthesis on climate-adaptation strategies in three days because a living evi

85、dence synthesis was sitting there with more than 17,000 studies already identified and assessedAs a group of funders,we have launched some promising pilot projects,but we know we have a long way to go in reducing research waste and in finding ways to collaborate with other funders and to engage impa

86、ct-oriented evidence producersParadoxically,some global public-goods producers like Cochrane are in their most fragile funding position ever,and others like Campbell have never been sustainably funded10The third implementation priority put evidence at the centre of everyday life is where we turn our

87、 focus to citizens,who are at the end of the day the people who government policymakers,organizational leaders,and professionals,as well as those working in multilateral organizations,are meant to serve.We have seen some small-scale responses from governments and from citizen-serving non-governmenta

88、l organizations(NGOs).There has been more focus on polarization and misinformation and efforts to address both.There has been more recognition of the need to maximize the benefits of artificial intelligence(e.g.,ChatGPT)while minimizing its harms.The Evidence Commission itself brought together diver

89、se citizens as part of two citizen panels addressing how to put evidence at the centre of everyday life.The Evidence Commissions secretariat,the Evidence Commissions Citizen Leadership Group and their partners are speaking with many citizen-serving NGOs and citizen leaders to identify what is going

90、well that needs to be systematized and scaled up,and what gaps should be prioritized to fill,and to work with government policymakers and citizen-serving NGOs,among others,to push for improvements.The context for these efforts is that citizens make many decisions where evidence could be helpful.Howe

91、ver,they encounter three challenges in doing so.We illustrate these points in the infographic below.Put evidence at the centre of everyday lifeManaging my health,safety and well-being(and that of my familys)Spending my money on products and servicesVolunteering my time and donating moneyCitizens mak

92、e many decisions where evidence could be helpful,such as:Three challenges We live in an era of too much information and lots of misinformation (false information that is spread,regardless of intent to mislead)We are typically left on our own to find,understand and use evidence Opportunity to look fo

93、r evidence,including time and internet access Motivation to look for and make sense of evidence Capacity to use digital platforms like websites and social media(digital literacy),select the right sources for them(media literacy),to put whats known in a bigger context(e.g.,education,health and climat

94、e literacy)distinguish between best evidence and other things and to understand what it may mean for them(evidence literacy)or understand what they are reading(general literacy)Governments,businesses and NGOs do not set things up to make it easy for us Services are commonly offered without evidence

95、to help distinguish among them Products are commonly sold in-store and online without evidence to back up their claims(and they may be sold alongside proven products)Information is commonly presented online based on profile and search history and not based on evidence(and laws protecting us against

96、advertising and selling products that may be harmful or dangerous,or about making false claims,do not apply yet to information)Compelling stories and visuals are commonly created by people with limited evidence literacy11These are early days in understanding what works in putting evidence at the cen

97、tre of everyday life.Below we illustrate four possible ways to do so,with many examples of each.Laws that require products,services and information to be evidence-based(and make it illegal to spread misinformation)Rewards for businesses advertising evidence-based products,services and information(an

98、d penalties for not)Algorithms for big tech companies presenting products,services and information in part based on supporting evidence(and for limiting the spread of misinformation)Using nudge strategies to steer citizens towards evidence-based choices,while still allowing them to go look at other

99、choices too(e.g.,automatic enrolments,product placements,symbols or kitemarks)Tools and training to develop critical-thinking skills(e.g.,thatsaclaim.org and Sense About Sciences risk know-how framework),including in schools Plain-language summaries of best evidence on different topics(e.g.,Campbell

100、 and Cochrane)and accompanying audio-visual materials Journalism and science-communication strategies(e.g.,fact-checking services,pre-bunking to help people know what to watch out for with misinformation and conspiracy theories,and truth-sandwiches to what the evidence says immediately before and af

101、ter covering misinformation)Campaigns to build a culture where evidence is understood,valued and used(evidence weeks and#askforevidence hashtag)Online sites like Wirecutter for shopping products,80,000 hours for finding high-impact careers or high-impact volunteering opportunities,and GiveWell for g

102、iving to the charities that make the most of every dollar they receive Tools,such as decision aids,that help to work through options in light of their pros and cons Website questions can be submitted to organizations funding research Prioritization processes that engage citizens(e.g.,James Lind Alli

103、ance)Support for citizens to become partners in a research team undertaking a new research study or synthesizing whats known from all studies addressing the same questionHelp citizens judge what others are claiming or more generally find(and receive)reliable information on a topicMake evidence avail

104、able to citizens when they are making choicesEngage citizens in asking questions and answering them(with new research or with existing evidence)Make evidence-based choices the default or easy optionI often tell my fellow citizen leaders:Google is a great place to go to pick a restaurant or learn mor

105、e about a public figure;it poses real challenges if youre looking for best evidence to make an important decisionWhile this approach sounds promising,those of us working in citizen-serving NGOs have come to realize that declining trust in government and business leaders has led to rising concerns ab

106、out this approach among citizens12We need to capitalize on windows of opportunity and not just return to old ways of doing things.COVID-19 showed us the perils of many old ways of doing things,but also spurred many innovations that need to become the new normal in using evidence to address societal

107、challenges.If we do not act now,we will not be prepared to pivot to address future crises.These implementation priorities are highly synergistic.While we have given more explicit attention to the synergies between domestic evidence-support systems and the global evidence architecture,there are also

108、synergies between domestic evidence-support systems and putting evidence at the centre of everyday life.Citizens are the ones to hold government policymakers and others to account when they do harm or waste money on ineffective solutions.The secretariat and Implementation Council are keen to work wi

109、th any groups interested in contributing to our three implementation priorities.Formalize and strengthen domestic evidence-support systems conduct or participate in a rapid evidence-support system assessment for your country and find ways to act on the lessons learned if one has already been conduct

110、ed.Enhance and leverage the global evidence architecture encourage funders and donors both in your own country and those operating globally to be part of the solution and encourage impact-oriented evidence producers especially those producing global public goods like living evidence syntheses to wor

111、k in more coordinated ways and to build connections to domestic evidence-support networks and units.Put evidence at the centre of everyday life support citizen-serving NGOs and citizen leaders to take action in your country.The Evidence Commissions secretariat and Implementation Council also welcome

112、 expressions of interest from any groups interested in complementing what we are doing with the three implementation priorities,with recommendations that do not fall within these current priorities(e.g.,those related to UN system entities)or with formally monitoring progress against each recommendat

113、ion.Conclusion13Appendix 1 Four groups are involved in addressing the Evidence Commissions implementation priorities.Evidence Commission Implementation Council,which:focuses on all three implementation priorities includes many partners from the COVID-19 Evidence Network to support Decision-making(CO

114、VID-END)that spurred the creation of and supported the work of the Evidence Commission Rapid Evidence-Support System Assessment(RESSA)Country Leads Group,which:focuses on priority 1:formalizing and strengthening domestic evidence-support systems shares lessons learned from conducting RESSAs in parti

115、cipating countries and taking action based on what was learned Global Evidence Producers Group,which:focuses on priority 2:enhancing and leveraging the global evidence architecture discusses opportunities to improve coordination and reduce duplication and ways to engage funders and donors in these o

116、pportunities Citizen Leadership Group,which:focuses on priority 3:putting evidence at the centre of everyday life provides a forum for citizen leaders and leaders of citizen-serving organizations to shape thinking and action.Additional details about these four groups are available on the Evidence Co

117、mmission website.The secretariat continues to engage other groups as needed,including:funders and donors that may be interested in supporting the global evidence architecture commissioners translation teams,including:for Arabic,the Knowledge to Policy Center,American University of Beirut for Chinese

118、,the Evidence-Based Social Science Research Center,Lanzhou University for French,the McMaster Health Forum for Portuguese,Fiocruz Brasilia for Spanish,the Unit for Evidence and Deliberation for Decision Making in the Faculty of Medicine,Universidad de Antioquia.The secretariat thanks the Evidence Co

119、mmissions funders for their ongoing support of its work:American Institutes for Research,Canadian Institutes of Health Research,CMA Foundation/Fondation AMC,Healthcare Excellence Canada,Health Research Board,and Michael Smith Health Research BC.14Twenty of the 24 Evidence Commission recommendations

120、can be grouped into the secretariats three implementation priorities.Government policymakers Four recommendations called for fit-for-purpose domestic evidence-support systems 5,evidence-support staff and partnerships 6,science advisors 7,and advisory bodies 8Organizational leaders,professionals and

121、citizens One recommendation called for every significant organizational association,professional body,and impact-oriented civil-society group to contribute meaningfully to its domestic evidence-support system 12Evidence intermediaries One recommendation called for dedicated evidence intermediaries t

122、o support decision-makers with best evidence and evidence producers with insights and opportunities for making an impact with evidence 14,and another called for the timely and responsive matching of the right form of evidence to the question asked 16Government policymakers One recommendation called

123、for building a more diversified evidence base 9Impact-oriented evidence producers Five recommendations called for them to:1)fill gaps and adhere to standards 17;2)respond,refer or work with others 18;3)learn from evidence groups in other sectors 19;4)be prepared to pivot for global emergencies 20;an

124、d 5)make evidence understandable 21;and a sixth called for academic institutions to incentivize faculty members to contribute to their domestic evidence-support systems and to evidence-related global public goods 22Funders One recommendation called for spending smarter,and ideally more,on evidence s

125、upport,particularly on domestic evidence-support systems,and with some funding allocated to evidence-related global public goods 24Government policymakers One recommendation called for incentivizing open science as a key enabler for using evidence in decision-making 10 and another for ensuring that

126、regulatory regimes and ongoing validation schemes for artificial intelligence(AI)optimize AIs benefits for evidence-support systems and minimize its harms 11Impact-oriented evidence producers One recommendation called for journals to improve the ways in which they support the use of best evidence 23

127、Organizational leaders,professionals and citizens One recommendation called on citizens to consider the many ways they can use best evidence in everyday life,and to consider supporting politicians(and others)who enable this 13Evidence intermediaries One recommendation called on news and social-media

128、 platforms to build relationships with dedicated evidence intermediaries who can help leverage sources of best evidence,and with evidence producers who can help communicate evidence effectively,as well as ensure their algorithms present best evidence and combat misinformation 15Four additional recom

129、mendations will be the focus of future attention,including:two recommendations targeting all who can take action,with one a wake-up call 1 and the second a proposed new standard for responding to ask for evidence any time a claim is made(e.g.,this intervention works)2 two recommendations targeting m

130、ultilateral organizations,with one calling for a resolution by multilateral organizations 3 and the second a landmark report 4.This plus enhancing and leveraging theglobal evidence architectureFormalizing and strengthening domestic evidence-support systemsEnhancing and leveraging theglobal evidence architecturePutting evidenceat the centre of everyday lifeAppendix 2