BMJ 2002;324:1456 ( 15 June )

Letters

Informaticist services for policymakers will differ from those studied

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

EDITOR---We were pleased to see Greenhalgh et al's formal evaluation of two quite different informaticist services.1 Our own experience in facilitating evidence supported policymaking suggests that some of the points raised apply to policy as well as to practice, though additional points must be considered. Our developing approach has some commonality with both projects but is aimed at policymaking bodies comprising health professionals and lay representatives rather than groups of practitioners.

We decided that a "laboratory test service" approach would not be appropriate in policymaking, although as an academic unit we found it intuitively attractive, at least initially. We were obliged to recognise that health policy issues rarely resolve into a question that can be answered in three stages. Often, several questions need to be tackled simultaneously as policymakers need to consider local processes, structures, times scales, and concerns. 2 3

The outcome is a set of options rather than . . . [Full text of this article]
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to StumbleUpon StumbleUpon   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Article

A comparative case study of two models of a clinical informaticist service
Trisha Greenhalgh, Jane Hughes, Charlotte Humphrey, Stephen Rogers, Deborah Swinglehurst, and Peter Martin
BMJ 2002 324: 524-529. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Access jobs at BMJ Careers
Whats new online at Student BMJ