Publication Date
In 2025 | 0 |
Since 2024 | 0 |
Since 2021 (last 5 years) | 0 |
Since 2016 (last 10 years) | 1 |
Since 2006 (last 20 years) | 2 |
Descriptor
Cancer | 2 |
Evidence Based Practice | 2 |
Screening Tests | 2 |
Comparative Analysis | 1 |
Comparative Education | 1 |
Credibility | 1 |
Decision Making | 1 |
Evidence | 1 |
Expertise | 1 |
Foreign Countries | 1 |
Health Programs | 1 |
More ▼ |
Source
Evidence & Policy: A Journal… | 2 |
Author
Carter, Stacy | 2 |
Flitcroft, Kathy | 1 |
Gillespie, James | 1 |
Rychetnik, Lucie | 1 |
Salkeld, Glenn | 1 |
Trevena, Lyndal | 1 |
Williams, Jane | 1 |
Publication Type
Journal Articles | 2 |
Reports - Evaluative | 1 |
Reports - Research | 1 |
Education Level
Audience
Location
Australia | 1 |
New Zealand | 1 |
United Kingdom | 1 |
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Williams, Jane; Rychetnik, Lucie; Carter, Stacy – Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, 2020
Background: Organised cervical screening programmes are a combination of arrangements designed to maximise benefit and minimise harm associated with cervical cancer at the population level. Many organised programmes are described as 'evidence-based', reflecting an expectation that healthcare should be based on the tenets of Evidence-Based Medicine…
Descriptors: Cancer, Medical Evaluation, Evidence Based Practice, Health Programs
Flitcroft, Kathy; Gillespie, James; Carter, Stacy; Salkeld, Glenn; Trevena, Lyndal – Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, 2014
Much of the evidence translation literature focuses narrowly on the use of evidence in the initial policy formulation stages, and downplays the crucial role of institutions and the inherently political nature of policy making. More recent approaches acknowledge the importance of institutional and political factors, but make no attempt to…
Descriptors: Public Health, Public Policy, Evidence Based Practice, Political Influences