Now showing items 1-4 of 4

    • Communicating about screening 

      Entwistle, V; Carter, SM; Trevena, L; Flitcroft, K; Irwig, L; McCaffery, K; Salkeld, G (BMJ, 2008)
      Informed choice is important for screening, but not everyone wants or is able to analyse research data. Vikki Entwistle and colleagues propose a new approach to communication People are offered a wide range of screening ...
    • Getting evidence into policy: The need for deliberative strategies? 

      Flitcroft, K; Gillespie, James; Salkeld, G; Carter, SM; Trevena, L (Pergamon, 2011-04)
      Getting evidence into policy is notoriously difficult. In this empirical case study we used document analysis and key informant interviews to explore the Australian federal government’s policy to implement a national bowel ...
    • Incorporating evidence and politics in health policy: Can institutionalising evidence review make a difference? 

      Flitcroft, K; Gillespie, J; Carter, SM; Salkeld, G; Trevena, L (Policy Press, 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 ...
    • 'When good evidence is not enough: the role of context in bowel cancer screening policy in New Zealand'. 

      Flitcroft, K; Gillespie, J; Carter, SM; Trevena, L; Salkeld, G (Policy Press, 2011)
      Bowel cancer is a serious health problem in developed countries. Australia, the United Kingdom (UK) and New Zealand (NZ) reviewed the same randomised controlled trial evidence on the benefits and harms of population-based ...